{"collection":"philosophy-ethics","full_text_available":true,"graph_url":"https://unchartedknowledge.5gfusion.net/v2/api/page/gutenberg_49726/graph","html_url":"https://unchartedknowledge.5gfusion.net/v2/page/gutenberg_49726","id":"gutenberg_49726","license":"Public Domain (US)","rights_basis":"gutenberg_metadata_copyright_false","source":"gutenberg","source_url":"https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/49726","summary":null,"tags":["Category: French Literature","Category: Humour","Category: Philosophy & Ethics","Voltaire, 1694-1778 -- Translations into English"],"text":"_The WORKS of VOLTAIRE_\n\n _EDITION DE LA PACIFICATION_\n\n _Limited to one thousand sets\n for America and Great Britain._\n\n             \u201c_Between two servants of Humanity, who appeared\n eighteen hundred years apart, there is a mysterious relation.\n *\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0*\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0*\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0*\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0*\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0Let us say it with a sentiment of\n profound respect: JESUS WEPT: VOLTAIRE SMILED.\n Of that divine tear and of that human smile is composed the\n sweetness of the present civilization._\u201d\n                                             _VICTOR HUGO._\n\n\n[Illustration: AT THIS INTERESTING MOMENT, AS MAY EASILY BE\nIMAGINED, WHO SHOULD COME IN BUT THE UNCLE]\n\n\n\n\n _EDITION DE LA PACIFICATION_\n\n THE WORKS OF\n VOLTAIRE\n A CONTEMPORARY VERSION\n\n With Notes by Tobias Smollett, Revised and Modernized\n New Translations by William F. Fleming, and an\n Introduction by Oliver H. G. Leigh\n\n A CRITIQUE AND BIOGRAPHY\n BY\n THE RT. HON. JOHN MORLEY\n\n _FORTY-THREE VOLUMES_\n\n ONE HUNDRED AND SIXTY-EIGHT DESIGNS,\n COMPRISING REPRODUCTIONS OF RARE OLD\n ENGRAVINGS, STEEL PLATES, PHOTOGRAVURES,\n AND CURIOUS FAC-SIMILES\n\n VOLUME IV\n\n E. R. DuMONT\n PARIS : LONDON : NEW YORK : CHICAGO\n\n\n\n\n COPYRIGHT 1901\n BY E. R. DUMONT\n\n OWNED by\n THE WERNER COMPANY\n AKRON, OHIO\n\n\n MADE BY\n THE WERNER COMPANY\n AKRON, OHIO\n\n\n\n\n VOLTAIRE\n\n ROMANCES\n\n IN THREE VOLUMES\n VOL. III.\n\n\n\n\n       CONTENTS\n\n       \u2014\u2014\u2014\u2014\u2014\u2014\n    I. ANDR\u00c9 DES TOUCHES IN SIAM \u2026 5\n\n   II. THE BLIND AS JUDGES OF COLOR \u2026 13\n\n  III. THE CLERGYMAN AND HIS SOUL \u2026 15\n\n   IV. A CONVERSATION WITH A CHINESE \u2026 28\n\n    V. MEMNON THE PHILOSOPHER \u2026 33\n\n   VI. PLATO\u2019S DREAM \u2026 42\n\n  VII. AN ADVENTURE IN INDIA \u2026 47\n\n VIII. BABABEC \u2026 51\n\n   IX. ANCIENT FAITH AND FABLE \u2026 56\n\n    X. THE TWO COMFORTERS \u2026 61\n\n   XI. DIALOGUE BETWEEN MARCUS AURELIUS AND A RECOLLET\n       FRIAR \u2026 64\n\n  XII. DIALOGUE BETWEEN A BRAHMIN AND A JESUIT \u2026 70\n\n XIII. DIALOGUES BETWEEN LUCRETIUS AND POSIDONIUS \u2026 76\n\n  XIV. DIALOGUE BETWEEN A CLIENT AND HIS LAWYER \u2026 95\n\n   XV. DIALOGUE BETWEEN MADAME DE MAINTENON AND MDLLE. DE\n       L\u2019ENCLOS \u2026 101\n\n  XVI. DIALOGUE BETWEEN A SAVAGE AND A BACHELOR OF ARTS \u2026 108\n\n       \u2014\u2014\u2014\u2014\u2014\u2014\n       A TREATISE ON TOLERATION.\n       [In 1762 Jean Calas, a Protestant of Toulouse, was\n       done to death by torture on the wheel on the false\n       charge of having slain his son, a suicide. His widow\n       and children were put to the torture to extort a\n       confession, in utter lack of evidence. Voltaire\n       devoted years of unremitting labor to agitating the\n       terrible crime and raising money compensation for the\n       victims. His pamphlets aroused substantial sympathy\n       and protests in England and over the Continent. His\n       efforts led to the writing of over one hundred plays,\n       poems, and pamphlets on the case. Voltaire had the\n       satisfaction of witnessing the triumph of his long\n       struggle. He narrates the facts in this Treatise,\n       which expands into a sweeping exposure of the\n       cruelties committed in the name of religion, in all\n       ages and countries.]\n\n\n\n       LIST OF PLATES\u2014VOL. IV\n\n       \u2014\u2014\u2014\u2014\u2014\u2014\n       MEMNON AND THE LADY\u2019S UNCLE \u2026 _Frontispiece_\n\n       THE DISCONSOLATE WOMAN \u2026 62\n\n       THE MAID OF ORLEANS AT THE STAKE \u2026 144\n\n       WIDOW CALAS APPEALS TO THE KING \u2026 286\n\n\n\n\n ANDR\u00c9 DES TOUCHES IN SIAM.\n\n\nAndr\u00e9 Des Touches was a very agreeable musician in the brilliant\nreign of Louis XIV., before the science of music was perfected by\nRameau, and before it was corrupted by those who prefer the art of\nsurmounting difficulties to nature and the real graces of composition.\n\nBefore he had recourse to these talents he had been a musketeer, and\nbefore that, in 1688, he went into Siam with the Jesuit Tachard, who\ngave him many marks of his affection, for the amusement he afforded\non board the ship; and Des Touches spoke with admiration of Father\nTachard for the rest of his life.\n\nIn Siam he became acquainted with the first commissary of Barcalon,\nwhose name was Croutef, and he committed to writing most of those\nquestions which he asked of Croutef, and the answers of that Siamese.\nThey are as follows:\n\nDES TOUCHES.\u2014How many soldiers have you?\n\nCROUTEF.\u2014Fourscore thousand, very indifferently paid.\n\nDES TOUCHES.\u2014And how many talapoins?\n\nCROUTEF.\u2014A hundred and twenty thousand, very idle and very rich. It\nis true that in the last war we were beaten, but our talapoins have\nlived sumptuously and built fine houses.\n\nDES TOUCHES.\u2014Nothing could have discovered more judgment. And your\nfinances, in what state are they?\n\nCROUTEF.\u2014In a very bad state. We have, however, about ninety thousand\nmen employed to render them prosperous, and if they have not\nsucceeded, it has not been their fault, for there is not one of them\nwho does not honorably seize all that he can get possession of, and\nstrip and plunder those who cultivate the ground for the good of the\nstate.\n\nDES TOUCHES.\u2014Bravo! And is not your jurisprudence as perfect as the\nrest of your administration?\n\nCROUTEF.\u2014It is much superior. We have no laws, but we have five or\nsix thousand volumes on the laws. We are governed in general by\ncustoms; for it is known that a custom, having been established by\nchance, is the wisest principle that can be imagined. Besides, all\ncustoms being necessarily different in different provinces, the\njudges may choose at their pleasure a custom which prevailed four\nhundred years ago or one which prevailed last year. It occasions a\nvariety in our legislation which our neighbors are forever admiring.\nThis yields a certain fortune to practitioners. It is a resource for\nall pleaders who are destitute of honor, and a pastime of infinite\namusement for the judges, who can, with safe consciences, decide\ncauses without understanding them.\n\nDES TOUCHES.\u2014But in criminal cases\u2014you have laws which may be\ndepended upon?\n\nCROUTEF.\u2014God forbid! We can condemn men to exile, to the galleys, to\nbe hanged; or we can discharge them, according to our own fancy. We\nsometimes complain of the arbitrary power of the Barcalon, but we\nchoose that all our decisions should be arbitrary.\n\nDES TOUCHES.\u2014That is very just. And the torture\u2014do you put people to\nthe torture?\n\nCROUTEF.\u2014It is our greatest pleasure. We have found it an infallible\nsecret to save a guilty person, who has vigorous muscles, strong\nand supple hamstrings, nervous arms, and firm loins, and we gayly\nbreak on the wheel all those innocent persons to whom nature has\ngiven feeble organs. It is thus we conduct ourselves with wonderful\nwisdom and prudence. As there are half proofs, I mean half truths,\nit is certain there are persons who are half innocent and half\nguilty. We commence, therefore, by rendering them half dead; we then\ngo to breakfast; afterwards ensues entire death, which gives us\ngreat consideration in the world, which is one of the most valuable\nadvantages of our offices.\n\nDES TOUCHES.\u2014It must be allowed that nothing can be more prudent and\nhumane. Pray tell me what becomes of the property of the condemned?\n\nCROUTEF.\u2014The children are deprived of it. For you know that nothing\ncan be more equitable than to punish the single fault of a parent on\nall his descendants.\n\nDES TOUCHES.\u2014Yes. It is a great while since I have heard of this\njurisprudence.\n\nCROUTEF.\u2014The people of Laos, our neighbors, admit neither the\ntorture, nor arbitrary punishments, nor the different customs,\nnor the horrible deaths which are in use among us; but we regard\nthem as barbarians who have no idea of good government. All Asia\nis agreed that we dance the best of all its inhabitants, and\nthat, consequently, it is impossible they should come near us in\njurisprudence, in commerce, in finance, and, above all, in the\nmilitary art.\n\nDES TOUCHES.\u2014Tell me, I beseech you, by what steps men arrive at the\nmagistracy in Siam.\n\nCROUTEF.\u2014By ready money. You perceive that it may be impossible to be\na good judge if a man has not by him thirty or forty thousand pieces\nof silver. It is in vain a man may be perfectly acquainted with all\nour customs; it is to no purpose that he has pleaded five hundred\ncauses with success\u2014that he has a mind which is the seat of judgment,\nand a heart replete with justice; no man can become a magistrate\nwithout money. This, I say, is the circumstance which distinguishes\nus from all Asia, and particularly from the barbarous inhabitants of\nLaos, who have the madness to recompense all kinds of talents, and\nnot to sell any employment.\n\nAndr\u00e9 Des Touches, who was a little off his guard, said to the\nSiamese that most of the airs which he had just sung sounded\ndiscordant to him, and wished to receive information concerning real\nSiamese music. But Croutef, full of his subject, and enthusiastic for\nhis country, continued in these words:\n\n\u201cWhat does it signify that our neighbors, who live beyond our\nmountains, have better music than we have, or better pictures,\nprovided we have always wise and humane laws? It is in that\ncircumstance we excel. For example:\n\n\u201cIf a man has adroitly stolen three or four hundred thousand pieces\nof gold we respect him, and we go and dine with him. But if a poor\nservant gets awkwardly into his possession three or four pieces\nof copper out of his mistress\u2019 box we never fail of putting that\nservant to a public death; first, lest he should not correct himself;\nsecondly, that he may not have it in his power to produce a great\nnumber of children for the state, one or two of whom might possibly\nsteal a few little pieces of copper, or become great men; thirdly,\nbecause it is just to proportion the punishment to the crime, and\nthat it would be ridiculous to give any useful employment in a prison\nto a person guilty of so enormous a crime.\n\n\u201cBut we are still more just, more merciful, more reasonable in the\nchastisements which we inflict on those who have the audacity to\nmake use of their legs to go wherever they choose. We treat those\nwarriors so well who sell us their lives, we give them so prodigious\na salary, they have so considerable a part in our conquests, that\nthey must be the most criminal of all men to wish to return to their\nparents on the recovery of their reason, because they had been\nenlisted in a state of intoxication. To oblige them to remain in one\nplace, we lodge about a dozen leaden balls in their heads, after\nwhich they become infinitely useful to their country.\n\n\u201cI will not speak of a great number of excellent institutions which\ndo not go so far as to shed the blood of men, but which render life\nso pleasant and agreeable that it is impossible the guilty should\navoid becoming virtuous. If a farmer has not been able to pay\npromptly a tax which exceeds his ability, we sell the pot in which he\ndresses his food; we sell his bed in order that, being relieved of\nall his superfluities, he may be in a better condition to cultivate\nthe earth.\u201d\n\nDES TOUCHES.\u2014That is extremely harmonious!\n\nCROUTEF.\u2014To comprehend our profound wisdom you must know that our\nfundamental principle is to acknowledge in many places as our\nsovereign a shaven-headed foreigner who lives at the distance of nine\nhundred miles from us. When we assign some of our best territories\nto any of our talapoins, which it is very prudent in us to do, that\nSiamese talapoin must pay the revenue of his first year to that\nshaven-headed Tartar, without which it is clear our lands would be\nunfruitful.\n\nBut the time, the happy time, is no more when that tonsured priest\ninduced one-half of the nation to cut the throats of the other half\nin order to decide whether Sammonocodom had played at leap-frog or\nat some other game; whether he had been disguised in an elephant or\nin a cow; if he had slept three hundred and ninety days on the right\nside or on the left. Those grand questions, which so essentially\naffect morality, agitated all minds; they shook the world; blood\nflowed plentifully for it; women were massacred on the bodies of\ntheir husbands; they dashed out the brains of their little infants\non the stones with a devotion, with a grace, with a contrition truly\nangelic. Woe to us! degenerate offspring of pious ancestors, who\nnever offer such holy sacrifices! But, heaven be praised, there are\nyet among us at least a few good souls who would imitate them if they\nwere permitted.\n\nDES TOUCHES.\u2014Tell me, I beseech you, sir, if in Siam you divide the\ntone major into two commas, or into two semi-commas, and if the\nprogress of the fundamental sounds are made by one, three, and nine?\n\nCROUTEF.\u2014By Sammonocodom, you are laughing at me. You observe no\nbounds. You have interrogated me on the form of our government, and\nyou speak to me of music!\n\nDES TOUCHES.\u2014Music is everything. It was at the foundation of all\nthe politics of the Greeks. But I beg your pardon; you have not a\ngood ear, and we will return to our subject. You said that in order\nto produce a perfect harmony\u2014\n\nCROUTEF.\u2014I was telling you that formerly the tonsured Tartar\npretended to dispose of all the kingdoms of Asia, which occasioned\nsomething very different from perfect harmony. But a very\nconsiderable benefit resulted from it; for people were then more\ndevout toward Sammonocodom and his elephant than they are now, for,\nat the present time, all the world pretends to common sense, with an\nindiscretion truly pitiable. However, all things go on; people divert\nthemselves, they dance, they play, they dine, they sup, they make\nlove; this makes every man shudder who entertains good intentions.\n\nDES TOUCHES.\u2014And what would you have more? You only want good music.\nIf you had good music you might call your nation the happiest in the\nworld.\n\n\n\n\n THE BLIND AS JUDGES OF COLOR.\n\n\nWhen the hospital of the Quinze Vingt was first founded the\npensioners were all equal, and their little affairs were concluded\nupon by a majority of votes. They distinguished perfectly by the\ntouch between copper and silver coin; they never mistook the wine\nof Brie for that of Burgundy. Their sense of smell was finer than\nthat of their neighbors who had the use of two eyes. They reasoned\nvery well on the four senses; that is, they knew everything they\nwere permitted to know, and they lived as peaceably and as happily\nas blind people could be supposed to do. But, unfortunately, one\nof their professors pretended to have clear ideas in respect to\nthe sense of seeing; he drew attention; he intrigued; he formed\nenthusiasts, and at last he was acknowledged chief of the community.\nHe pretended to be a judge of colors, and everything was lost.\n\nThis dictator of the Quinze Vingt chose at first a little council by\nthe assistance of which he got possession of all the alms. On this\naccount no person had the resolution to oppose him. He decreed that\nall the inhabitants of the Quinze Vingt were clothed in white. The\nblind pensioners believed him, and nothing was to be heard but their\ntalk of white garments, though, in fact, they possessed not one of\nthat color. All their acquaintances laughed at them. They made their\ncomplaints to the dictator, who received them very ill; he rebuked\nthem as innovators, freethinkers, rebels, who had suffered themselves\nto be seduced by the errors of those who had eyes, and who presumed\nto doubt that their chief was infallible. This contention gave rise\nto two parties.\n\nTo appease the tumult, the dictator issued a decree declaring that\nall their vestments were red. There was not one vestment of that\ncolor in the Quinze Vingt. The poor men were laughed at more than\never. Complaints were again made by the community. The dictator\nrushed furiously in, and the other blind men were as much enraged.\nThey fought a long time, and peace was not restored until the members\nof the Quinze Vingt were permitted to suspend their judgments in\nregard to the color of their dress.\n\nA deaf man, reading this little history, allowed that these people,\nbeing blind, were to blame in pretending to judge of colors, but he\nremained steady to his own opinion that those persons who were deaf\nwere the only proper judges of music.\n\n\n\n\n THE CLERGYMAN AND HIS SOUL.\n\n\n CHAPTER I.\n\nThere can be no doubt that everything in the world is governed by\nfatality. My own life is a convincing proof of this doctrine. The\nearl of Chesterfield, with whom I was a great favorite, had promised\nme that I should have the first living that fell to his gift. An old\nincumbent of eighty happened to die, and I immediately travelled post\nto London to remind the earl of his promise. I was honored with an\nimmediate interview, and was received with the greatest kindness. I\ninformed his lordship of the death of the rector, and of the hope I\ncherished relative to the disposal of the vacant living. He replied\nthat I really looked very ill. I answered that, thanks to God, my\ngreatest affliction was poverty. \u201cI am sorry for you,\u201d said his\nlordship, and he politely dismissed me with a letter of introduction\nto a Mr. Sidrac, who dwelt in the vicinity of Guildhall. I ran as\nfast as I could to this gentleman\u2019s house, not doubting but that he\nwould immediately install me in the wished-for living. I delivered\nthe earl\u2019s letter, and Mr. Sidrac, who had the honor to be my lord\u2019s\nsurgeon, asked me to sit down, and, producing a case of surgical\ninstruments, began to assure me that he would perform an operation\nwhich he trusted would very soon relieve me.\n\nYou must know that his lordship had understood that I was suffering\nfrom some dreadful complaint, and that he generously intended to have\nme cured at his own expense. The earl had the misfortune to be as\ndeaf as a post, a fact with which I, alas! had not been previously\nacquainted.\n\nDuring the time which I lost in defending myself against the attacks\nof Mr. Sidrac, who insisted positively upon curing me, whether I\nwould or no, one out of the fifty candidates who were all on the\nlookout, came to town, flew to my lord, begged the vacant living and\nobtained it.\n\nI was deeply in love with an interesting girl, a Miss Fidler, who\nhad promised to marry me upon condition of my being made rector. My\nfortunate rival not only got the living, but also my mistress into\nthe bargain!\n\nMy patron, upon being told of his mistake, promised to make me ample\namends, but alas! he died two days afterwards.\n\nMr. Sidrac demonstrated to me that, according to his organic\nstructure, my good patron could not have lived one hour longer. He\nalso clearly proved that the earl\u2019s deafness proceeded entirely from\nthe extreme dryness of the drums of his ears, and kindly offered, by\nan application of spirits of wine, to harden both of my ears to such\na degree that I should, in one month only, become as deaf as any peer\nof the realm.\n\nI discovered Mr. Sidrac to be a man of profound knowledge. He\ninspired me with a taste for the study of nature, and I could not but\nbe sensible of the valuable acquisition I had made in acquiring the\nfriendship of a man who was capable of relieving me, should I need\nhis services. Following his advice, I applied myself closely to the\nstudy of nature, to console myself for the loss of the rectory and of\nmy enchanting Miss Fidler.\n\n\n CHAPTER II.\n THE STUDY OF NATURE.\n\nAfter making many profound observations upon nature (having employed\nin the research my five senses, my spectacles, and a very large\ntelescope), I said one day to Mr. Sidrac: \u201cUnless I am much deceived,\nphilosophy laughs at us. I cannot discover any trace of what the\nworld calls nature; on the contrary, everything seems to me to be\nthe result of art. By art the planets are made to revolve around the\nsun, while the sun revolves on its own axis. I am convinced that some\ngenius has arranged things in such a manner that the square of the\nrevolutions of the planets is always in proportion to the cubic root\nfrom their distance to their centre, and one had need be a magician\nto find out how this is accomplished. The tides of the sea are the\nresult of art no less profound and no less difficult to explain.\n\n\u201cAll animals, vegetables, and minerals are arranged with due\nregard to weight and measure, number and motion. All is performed\nby springs, levers, pulleys, hydraulic machines, and chemical\ncombinations, from the insignificant flea to the being called man,\nfrom the grass of the field to the far-spreading oak, from a grain of\nsand to a cloud in the firmament of heaven. Assuredly, everything is\ngoverned by art, and the word nature is but a chimera.\u201d\n\n\u201cWhat you say,\u201d answered Mr. Sidrac, \u201chas been said many years ago,\nand so much the better, for the probability is greater that your\nremark is true. I am always astonished when I reflect that a grain\nof wheat cast into the earth will produce in a short time above a\nhandful of the same corn.\u201d \u201cStop,\u201d said I, foolishly, \u201cyou forget\nthat wheat must die before it can spring up again, at least so\nthey say at college.\u201d My friend Sidrac, laughing heartily at this\ninterruption, replied: \u201cThat assertion went down very well a few\nyears ago, when it was first published by an apostle called Paul, but\nin our more enlightened age the meanest laborer knows that the thing\nis altogether too ridiculous even for argument.\u201d\n\n\u201cMy dear friend,\u201d said I, \u201cexcuse the absurdity of my remarks; I\nhave hitherto been a theologian, and one cannot divest one\u2019s self in\na moment of every silly opinion.\u201d\n\n\n CHAPTER III.\n GOOD ADVICE.\n\nSome time after this conversation between the disconsolate person,\nwhom we shall call Goodman, and the clever anatomist, Mr. Sidrac, the\nlatter, one fine morning, observed his friend in St. James\u2019s Park,\nstanding in an attitude of deep thought. \u201cWhat is the matter?\u201d said\nthe surgeon. \u201cIs there anything amiss?\u201d \u201cNo,\u201d replied Goodman, \u201cbut I\nam left without a patron in the world since the death of my friend,\nwho had the misfortune to be so deaf. Now, supposing there be only\nten thousand clergymen in England, and granting these ten thousand\nhave each two patrons, the odds against my obtaining a bishopric are\ntwenty thousand to one; a reflection quite sufficient to give any\nman the blue-devils. I remember, it was once proposed to me to go\nout as cabin-boy to the East Indies. I was told that I should make\nmy fortune. But as I did not think I should make a good admiral,\nwhenever I should arrive at the distinction, I declined; and so,\nafter turning my attention to every profession under the sun, I am\nfixed for life as a poor clergyman, good for nothing.\u201d\n\n\u201cThen be a clergyman no longer!\u201d cried Sidrac, \u201cand turn\nphilosopher. What is your income?\u201d \u201cOnly thirty guineas a year,\u201d\nreplied Goodman, \u201calthough at the death of my mother it will be\nincreased to fifty.\u201d \u201cWell, my dear Goodman,\u201d continued Sidrac, \u201cthat\nsum is quite sufficient to support you in comfort. Thirty guineas\nare six hundred and thirty shillings, almost two shillings a day.\nWith this fixed income a man need do nothing to increase it, but is\nat perfect liberty to say all he thinks of the East India Company,\nthe House of Commons, the king, and all the royal family, of man\ngenerally and individually, and lastly, of God and His attributes;\nand the liberty we enjoy of expressing our thoughts upon these most\ninteresting topics is certainly very agreeable and amusing.\u201d\n\n\u201cCome and dine at my table every day. That will save you some little\nmoney. We will afterwards amuse ourselves with conversation, and\nyour thinking faculty will have the pleasure of communicating with\nmine by means of speech, which is certainly a very wonderful thing,\nthough its advantages are not duly appreciated by the greater part of\nmankind.\u201d\n\n\n CHAPTER IV.\n DIALOGUE UPON THE SOUL\n AND OTHER TOPICS.\n\nGOODMAN.\u2014But my dear Sidrac, why do you always say _my thinking\nfaculty_ and not _my soul_? If you used the latter term I should\nunderstand you much better.\n\nSIDRAC.\u2014And for my part, I freely confess I should not understand\nmyself. I _feel_, I _know_, that God has endowed me with the\nfaculties of thinking and speaking, but I can neither _feel_ nor\n_know_ that God has given me a thing called a soul.\n\nGOODMAN.\u2014Truly, upon reflection, I perceive that I know as little\nabout the matter as you do, though I own that I have all my life been\nbold enough to believe that I knew. I have often remarked that the\neastern nations apply to the soul the same word they use to express\nlife. After their example, the Latins understood the word _anima_\nto signify the life of the animal. The Greeks called the breath the\nsoul. The Romans translated the word breath by _spiritus_, and thence\nit is that the word spirit or soul is found in every modern nation.\nAs it happens that no one has ever seen this spirit or breath, our\nimagination has converted it into a being which it is impossible to\nsee or touch. The learned tell us that the soul inhabits the body\nwithout having any place in it, that it has the power of setting our\ndifferent organs in motion without being able to reach and touch\nthem; indeed, what has not been said upon the subject? The great\nLocke knew into what a chaos these absurdities had plunged the human\nunderstanding. In writing the only reasonable book upon metaphysics\nthat has yet appeared in the world, he did not compose a single\nchapter on the soul, and if by chance he now and then makes use of\nthe word, he only introduces it to stand for intellect or mind.\n\nIn fact, every human being, in spite of Bishop Berkeley, is sensible\nthat he has a mind, and that this mind or intellect is capable of\nreceiving ideas; but no one can feel that there is another being\u2014a\nsoul\u2014within him, which gives him motion, feeling, and thought. It\nis, in fact, ridiculous to use words we do not understand, and to\nadmit the existence of beings of whom we cannot have the slightest\nknowledge.\n\nSIDRAC.\u2014We are then agreed upon a subject which, for so many\ncenturies, has been a matter of dispute.\n\nGOODMAN.\u2014And I must observe that I am surprised we should have agreed\nupon it so soon.\n\nSIDRAC.\u2014Oh! that is not so astonishing. We really wish to know what\nis truth. If we were among the academies we should argue like the\ncharacters in Rabelais. If we had lived in those ages of darkness,\nthe clouds of which so long enveloped Great Britain, one of us would\nvery likely have burned the other. We are so fortunate as to be born\nin an age comparatively reasonable; we easily discover what appears\nto us to be truth, and we are not afraid to proclaim it.\n\nGOODMAN.\u2014You are right, but I fear that, after all, the truth we have\ndiscovered is not worth much. In mathematics, indeed, we have done\nwonders; from the most simple causes we have produced effects that\nwould have astonished Apollonius or Archimedes; but what have we\nproved in metaphysics? Absolutely nothing but our own ignorance.\n\nSIDRAC.\u2014And do you call that nothing? You grant the Supreme Being\nhas given you the faculties of feeling and thinking; He has in the\nsame manner given your feet the faculty of walking, your hands their\nwonderful dexterity, your stomach the capability of digesting food,\nand your heart the power of throwing arterial blood into all parts\nof your body. Everything we enjoy is derived from God, and yet we\nare totally ignorant of the means by which He governs and conducts\nthe universe. For my own part, as Shakespeare says, I thank Him for\nhaving taught me that of the principles of things I know absolutely\nnothing. It has always been a question in what manner the soul acted\nupon the body. Before attempting to answer this question, I must be\nconvinced that I have a soul. Either God has given us this wonderful\nspark of intellect, or He has gifted us with some principle that\nanswers equally well. In either case, we are still the creatures of\nHis divine will and goodness, and that is all I know about the matter.\n\nGOODMAN.\u2014But if you do not know, tell me at least what you are\ninclined to think upon the subject. You have opened skulls, and\ndissected the human f\u0153tus. Have you ever, in these dissections,\ndiscovered any appearance of a soul?\n\nSIDRAC.\u2014Not the least, and I have not been able to understand how an\nimmortal and spiritual essence could dwell for months together in a\nmembrane. It appears to me difficult to conceive that this pretended\nsoul existed before the foundation of the body; for in what could it\nhave been employed during the many ages previous to its mysterious\nunion with flesh? Again! how can we imagine a spiritual principle\nwaiting patiently in idleness during a whole eternity, in order to\nanimate a mass of matter for a space of time which, compared with\neternity, is less than a moment?\n\nIt is worse still when I am told that God forms immortal souls out\nof nothing, and then cruelly dooms them to an eternity of flames and\ntorments. What? burn a spirit, in which there can be nothing capable\nof burning; how can He burn the sound of a voice, or the wind that\nblows? though both the sound and wind were material during the short\ntime of their existence; but a pure spirit\u2014a thought\u2014a doubt\u2014I am\nlost in the labyrinth; on whichever side I turn, I find nothing but\nobscurity and absurdity, impossibility and contradiction. But I\nam quite at ease when I say to myself God is Master of all. He who\ncan cause each star to hold its particular course through the broad\nexpanse of the firmament can easily give to us sentiments and ideas\nwithout the aid of this atom called the soul. It is certain that God\nhas endowed all animals, in a greater or lesser degree, with thought,\nmemory, and judgment; He has given them life; it is demonstrated that\nthey have feeling, since they possess all the organs of feeling; if\nthen they have all this without a soul, why is it improbable that we\nhave none? and why do mankind flatter themselves that they alone are\ngifted with a spiritual and immortal principle?\n\nGOODMAN.\u2014Perhaps this idea arises from their inordinate vanity. I am\npersuaded that if the peacock could speak he would boast of his soul,\nand would affirm that it inhabited his magnificent tail. I am very\nmuch inclined to believe with you that God has created us thinking\ncreatures, with the faculties of eating, drinking, feeling, etc.,\nwithout telling us one word about the matter. We are as ignorant as\nthe peacock I just mentioned, and he who said that we live and die\nwithout knowing how, why, or wherefore, spoke nothing but the truth.\n\nSIDRAC.\u2014A celebrated author, whose name I forget, calls us nothing\nmore than the puppets of Providence, and this seems to me to be a\nvery good definition. An infinity of movements are necessary to our\nexistence, but we did not ourselves invent and produce motion. There\nis a Being who has created light, caused it to move from the sun\nto our eyes in about seven minutes. It is only by means of motion\nthat my five senses are put in action, and it is only by means of my\nsenses that I have ideas, hence it follows that my ideas are derived\nfrom the great author of motion, and when He informs me how He\ncommunicates these ideas to me, I will most sincerely thank Him.\n\nGOODMAN.\u2014And so will I. As it is I constantly thank Him for having\npermitted me, as Epictetus says, to contemplate for a period of some\nyears this beautiful and glorious world. It is true that He could\nhave made me happier by putting me in possession of Miss Fidler and a\ngood rectory, but still, such as I am, I consider myself as under a\ngreat obligation to God\u2019s parental kindness and care.\n\n_Sidrac._\u2014You say that it is in the power of God to give you a good\nliving, and to make you still happier than you are at present. There\nare many persons who would not scruple flatly to contradict this\nproposition of yours. Do you forget that you yourself sometimes\ncomplain of fatality? A man, and particularly a priest, ought never\nto contradict one day an assertion he has perhaps made the day\nbefore. All is but a succession of links, and God is wiser than to\nbreak the eternal chain of events, even for the sake of my dear\nfriend Goodman.\n\nGOODMAN.\u2014I did not foresee this argument when I was speaking of\nfatality, but to come at once to the point, if it be so, God is as\nmuch a slave as myself.\n\nSIDRAC.\u2014He is the slave of His will, of His wisdom, and of the laws\nwhich He has Himself instituted; and it is impossible that He can\ninfringe upon any of them, because it is impossible that He can\nbecome either weak or inconsistent.\n\nGOODMAN.\u2014But, my friend, what you say would tend to make us\nirreligious, for, if God cannot change any of the affairs of the\nworld, what is the use of teasing Him with prayers, or of singing\nhymns to His praise?\n\nSIDRAC.\u2014Well! who bids you worship or pray to God? We praise a man\nbecause we think him vain; we entreat of him when we think him weak\nand likely to change his purpose on account of our petitions. Let us\ndo our duty to God, by being just and true to each other. In that\nconsists our real prayers, and our most heartfelt praises.\n\n\n\n\n A CONVERSATION WITH A CHINESE.\n\n\nIn the year 1723 there was a Chinese in Holland who was both a\nlearned man and a merchant, two things that ought by no means to be\nincompatible; but which, thanks to the profound respect that is shown\nto money, and the little regard that the human species pay to merit,\nhave become so among us.\n\nThis Chinese, who spoke a little Dutch, happened to be in a\nbookseller\u2019s shop at the same time that some literati were assembled\nthere. He asked for a book; they offered him Bossuet\u2019s \u201cUniversal\nHistory,\u201d badly translated. At the title \u201cUniversal History\u201d\u2014\n\n\u201cHow pleased am I,\u201d cried the Oriental, \u201cto have met with this\nbook. I shall now see what is said of our great empire, of a nation\nthat has subsisted for upwards of fifty thousand years; of that long\ndynasty of emperors who have governed us for such a number of ages. I\nshall see what these Europeans think of the religion of our literati,\nand of that pure and simple worship we pay to the Supreme Being. What\na pleasure will it be for me to find how they speak of our arts, many\nof which are of a more ancient date with us than the eras of all the\nkingdoms of Europe! I fancy the author will be greatly mistaken in\nrelation to the war we had about twenty-two thousand five hundred and\nfifty-two years ago with the martial people of Tonquin and Japan,\nas well as the solemn embassy that the powerful emperor of Mogul\nsent to request a body of laws from us in the year of the world\n500000000000079123450000.\u201d\n\n\u201cLord bless you,\u201d said one of the literati, \u201cthere is hardly any\nmention made of that nation in this world. The only nation considered\nis that marvellous people, the Jews.\u201d\n\n\u201cThe Jews!\u201d said the Chinese; \u201cthose people then must certainly be\nmasters of three parts of the globe at least.\u201d\n\n\u201cThey hope to be so some day,\u201d answered the other; \u201cbut all we have\nhere are those peddlers you see going about with toys and nic-nacs,\nand who sometimes do us the honor to clip our gold and silver.\u201d\n\n\u201cSurely you are not serious,\u201d exclaimed the Chinese. \u201cCould those\npeople ever have been in possession of a vast empire?\u201d\n\nHere I joined in the conversation, and told him that for a few years\nthey were in possession of a small country to themselves; but that we\nwere not to judge of a people from the extent of their dominions, any\nmore than of a man by his riches.\n\n\u201cBut does not this book take notice of some other nations?\u201d demanded\nthe man of letters.\n\n\u201cUndoubtedly,\u201d replied a learned gentleman who stood at my elbow; \u201cit\ntreats largely of a small country about sixty leagues wide, called\nEgypt, in which it is said that there is a lake of one hundred and\nfifty leagues in circumference, made by the hands of man.\u201d\n\n\u201cMy God!\u201d exclaimed the Chinese, \u201ca lake of one hundred and fifty\nleagues in circumference within a spot of ground only sixty leagues\nwide. This is very curious!\u201d\n\n\u201cThe inhabitants of that country,\u201d continued the doctor, \u201cwere all\nsages.\u201d\n\n\u201cWhat happy times were those!\u201d cried the Chinese; \u201cbut is that all?\u201d\n\n\u201cNo,\u201d replied the other, \u201cthere is mention made of those famous\npeople the Greeks.\u201d\n\n\u201cGreeks! Greeks!\u201d said the Asiatic, \u201cwho are those Greeks?\u201d\n\n\u201cWhy,\u201d replied the philosopher, \u201cthey were masters of a little\nprovince, about the two-hundredth part as large as China, but whose\nfame spread over the whole world.\u201d\n\n\u201cIndeed!\u201d said the Chinese, with an air of openness and\ningenuousness; \u201cI declare I never heard the least mention of these\npeople, either in the Mogul\u2019s country, in Japan, or in Great Tartary.\u201d\n\n\u201cOh, the barbarian! the ignorant creature!\u201d cried out our sage very\npolitely. \u201cWhy, then, I suppose you know nothing of Epaminondas the\nTheban, nor of the Pierian heaven, nor the names of Achilles\u2019 two\nhorses, nor of Silenus\u2019 ass? You have never heard speak of Jupiter,\nnor of Diogenes, nor of Lais, nor of Cybele, nor of\u2014\u201d\n\n\u201cI am very much afraid,\u201d said the learned Oriental, interrupting\nhim, \u201cthat you know nothing of that eternally memorable adventure of\nthe famous Xixofon Concochigramki, nor of the mysteries of the great\nFi-psi-hi-hi! But pray tell me what other unknown things does this\n\u201cUniversal History\u201d treat of?\u201d\n\nUpon this my learned neighbor harangued for a quarter of an hour\ntogether about the Roman republic, and when he came to Julius C\u00e6sar\nthe Chinese stopped him, and very gravely said:\n\n\u201cI think I have heard of him; was he not a Turk?\u201d\n\n\u201cHow!\u201d cried our sage in a fury, \u201cdon\u2019t you so much as know the\ndifference between pagans, Christians, and Mahometans? Did you never\nhear of Constantine? Do you know nothing of the history of the popes?\u201d\n\n\u201cWe have heard something confusedly of one Mahomet,\u201d replied the\nAsiatic.\n\n\u201cIt is surely impossible,\u201d said the other, \u201cbut you must have heard\nat least of Luther, Zwinglius, Bellarmine, and \u0152colampadius.\u201d\n\n\u201cI shall never remember all those names,\u201d said the Chinese, and\nso saying he quitted the shop, and went to sell a large quantity\nof Pekoe tea and fine calico, and then, after purchasing what\nmerchandise he required, set sail for his own country, adoring Tien,\nand recommending himself to Confucius.\n\nAs to myself, the conversation I had been witness to plainly\ndiscovered to me the nature of vain glory; and I could not forbear\nexclaiming:\n\n\u201cSince C\u00e6sar and Jupiter are names unknown to the finest, most\nancient, most extensive, most populous, and most civilized kingdom\nin the universe, it becomes ye well, O ye rulers of petty states!\nye pulpit orators of a narrow parish, or a little town! ye doctors\nof Salamanca, or of Bourges! ye trifling authors, and ye heavy\ncommentators!\u2014it becomes you well, indeed, to aspire to fame and\nimmortality.\u201d\n\n\n\n\n MEMNON THE PHILOSOPHER.\n\n\nMemnon one day took it into his head to become a great philosopher.\n\u201cTo be perfectly happy,\u201d said he to himself, \u201cI have nothing to do\nbut to divest myself entirely of passions, and nothing is more easy,\nas everybody knows. In the first place, I will never be in love,\nfor when I see a beautiful woman I will say to myself, These cheeks\nwill one day grow sallow and wrinkled, these eyes be encircled with\nvermilion, that bosom become lean and emaciated, that head bald and\npalsied. Now, I have only to consider her at present in imagination\nas she will afterwards appear in reality, and certainly a fair face\nwill never turn my head.\n\n\u201cIn the second place, I shall always be temperate. It will be in vain\nto tempt me with good cheer, with delicious wines, or the charms of\nsociety. I will have only to figure to myself the consequences of\nexcess\u2014an aching head, a loathing stomach, the loss of reason, of\nhealth, and of time; I will then only eat to supply the waste of\nnature; my health will be always equal, my ideas pure and luminous.\nAll this is so easy that there is no merit in accomplishing it.\n\n\u201cBut,\u201d says Memnon, \u201cI must think a little of how I am to regulate\nmy fortune; why, my desires are moderate, my wealth is securely\nplaced with the receiver-general of the finances of Nineveh. I\nhave wherewithal to live independent, and that is the greatest of\nblessings. I shall never be under the cruel necessity of dancing\nattendance at court. I will never envy any one, and nobody will envy\nme. Still all this is easy. I have friends, and I will preserve them,\nfor we shall never have any difference. I will never take amiss\nanything they may say or do; and they will behave in the same way to\nme. There is no difficulty in all this.\u201d\n\nHaving thus laid this little plan of philosophy in his closet,\nMemnon put his head out of the window. He saw two women walking\nunder the plane trees near his house. The one was old and appeared\nquite at her ease. The other was young, handsome, and seemingly much\nagitated. She sighed, she wept, and seemed on that account still\nmore beautiful. Our philosopher was touched, not, to be sure, with\nthe lady (he was too much determined not to feel any uneasiness\nof that kind), but with the distress which he saw her in. He came\ndownstairs and accosted the young Ninevite, designing to console\nher with philosophy. That lovely person related to him, with an air\nof the greatest simplicity and in the most affecting manner, the\ninjuries she sustained from an imaginary uncle\u2014with what art he had\ndeprived her of some imaginary property, and of the violence which\nshe pretended to dread from him.\n\n\u201cYou appear to me,\u201d said she, \u201ca man of such wisdom that if you will\ncome to my house and examine into my affairs, I am persuaded you will\nbe able to relieve me from the cruel embarrassment I am at present\ninvolved in.\u201d\n\nMemnon did not hesitate to follow her, to examine her affairs\nphilosophically, and to give her sound counsel.\n\nThe afflicted lady led him into a perfumed chamber and politely\nmade him sit down with her on a large sofa, where they both placed\nthemselves opposite to each other, in the attitude of conversation,\nthe one eager in telling her story, the other listening with devout\nattention. The lady spoke with downcast eyes, whence there sometimes\nfell a tear, and which, as she now and then ventured to raise them,\nalways met those of the sage Memnon. Their discourse was full of\ntenderness, which redoubled as often as their eyes met. Memnon took\nher affairs exceedingly to heart and felt himself every instant more\nand more inclined to oblige a person so virtuous and so unhappy. By\ndegrees, in the warmth of conversation, they drew nearer. Memnon\ncounselled her with great wisdom, and gave her most tender advice.\n\nAt this interesting moment, as may easily be imagined, who should\ncome in but the uncle? He was armed from head to foot, and the first\nthing he said was that he would immediately sacrifice, as was just,\nboth Memnon and his niece. The latter, who made her escape, knew that\nhe was disposed to pardon, provided a good round sum were offered\nto him. Memnon was obliged to purchase his safety with all he had\nabout him. In those days people were happy in getting so easily quit.\nAmerica was not then discovered, and distressed ladies were not then\nso dangerous as they are now.\n\nMemnon, covered with shame and confusion, got home to his own house.\nHe there found a card inviting him to attend dinner with some of his\nintimate friends.\n\n\u201cIf I remain at home alone,\u201d said he, \u201cI shall have my mind so\noccupied with this vexatious adventure that I shall not be able\nto eat a bit and I shall bring upon myself some disease. It will,\ntherefore be prudent in me to go to my intimate friends and partake\nwith them of a frugal repast. I shall forget in the sweets of their\nsociety the folly I have this morning been guilty of.\u201d\n\nAccordingly he attends the meeting; he is discovered to be uneasy at\nsomething, and he is urged to drink and banish care.\n\n\u201cA little wine, drunk in moderation, comforts the heart of God and\nman\u201d\u2014so reasoned Memnon the philosopher, and he became intoxicated.\nAfter the repast, play is proposed.\n\n\u201cA little play with one\u2019s intimate friends is a harmless pastime.\u201d He\nplays and loses all in his purse and four times as much on his word.\nA dispute arises on some circumstance in the game and the disputants\ngrow warm. One of his intimate friends throws a dice-box at his head\nand strikes out one of his eyes. The philosopher Memnon is carried\nhome drunk and penniless, with the loss of an eye.\n\nHe sleeps out his debauch and when his head becomes clear he sends\nhis servant to the receiver-general of the finances of Nineveh to\ndraw a little money to pay his debt of honor to his intimate friends.\nThe servant returns and informs him that the receiver-general had\nthat morning been declared a fraudulent bankrupt, and that by this\nmeans a hundred families are reduced to poverty and despair. Memnon,\nalmost beside himself, puts a plaster on his eye and a petition\nin his pocket, and goes to court to solicit justice from the king\nagainst the bankrupt. In the saloon he meets a number of ladies, all\nin the highest spirits and sailing along with hoops four-and-twenty\nfeet in circumference. One of them, slightly acquainted with him,\neyed him askance, and cried aloud: \u201cAh! what a horrid monster!\u201d\n\nAnother, who was better acquainted with him, thus accosts him:\n\u201cGood-morrow, Mr. Memnon; I hope you are well, Mr. Memnon. La! Mr.\nMemnon, how did you lose your eye?\u201d and, turning upon her heel, she\ntripped unconcernedly away.\n\nMemnon hid himself in a corner and waited for the moment when he\ncould throw himself at the feet of the monarch. That moment at last\narrived. Three times he kissed the earth and presented his petition.\nHis gracious majesty received him very favorably and referred the\npaper to one of his satraps. The satrap takes Memnon aside and says\nto him, with a haughty air and satirical grin:\n\n\u201cHark ye, you fellow with the one eye; you must be a comical dog\nindeed to address yourself to the king rather than to me, and still\nmore so to dare to demand justice against an honest bankrupt,\nwhom I honor with my protection, and who is also a nephew to the\nwaiting-maid of my mistress. Proceed no further in this business, my\ngood friend, if you wish to preserve the eye you have left.\u201d\n\nMemnon, having thus in his closet resolved to renounce women, the\nexcess of the table, play, and quarrelling, but especially having\ndetermined never to go to court, had been, in the short space of\nfour-and-twenty hours, duped and robbed by a gentle dame, had got\ndrunk, had gamed, had been engaged in a quarrel, had got his eye\nknocked out, and had been at court, where he was sneered at and also\ninsulted.\n\nPetrified with astonishment, and his heart broken with grief, Memnon\nreturns homeward in despair. As he was about to enter his house,\nhe is repulsed by a number of officers who are carrying off his\nfurniture for the benefit of his creditors. He falls down almost\nlifeless under a plane tree. There he finds the fair dame of the\nmorning, who was walking with her dear uncle, and both set up a loud\nlaugh on seeing Memnon with his plaster. The night approached, and\nMemnon made his bed on some straw near the walls of his house. Here\nthe ague seized him and he fell asleep in one of the fits, when a\ncelestial spirit appeared to him in a dream.\n\nIt was all resplendent with light; it had six beautiful wings, but\nneither feet, nor head, and could be likened to nothing.\n\n\u201cWhat art thou?\u201d said Memnon.\n\n\u201cThy good genius,\u201d replied the spirit.\n\n\u201cRestore me, then, my eye, my health, my fortune, my reason,\u201d said\nMemnon, and he related how he had lost them all in one day.\n\n\u201cThese are adventures which never happen to us in the world we\ninhabit,\u201d said the spirit.\n\n\u201cAnd what world do you inhabit?\u201d said the man of affliction.\n\n\u201cMy native country,\u201d replied the other, \u201cis five hundred millions of\nleagues distant from the sun, in a little star near Sirius.\u201d\n\n\u201cCharming country!\u201d said Memnon. \u201cAnd are there indeed with you no\njades to dupe a poor devil, no intimate friends that win his money\nand knock out an eye for him, no fraudulent bankrupts, no satraps\nthat make a jest of you while they refuse you justice?\u201d\n\n\u201cNo,\u201d said the inhabitant of the star, \u201cwe have nothing of the kind.\nWe are never duped by women because we have none among us; we never\ncommit excesses at table because we neither eat nor drink; we have\nno bankrupts because with us there is neither silver nor gold; our\neyes cannot be knocked out because we have not bodies in the form of\nyours, and satraps never do us injustice, because in our world we are\nall equal.\u201d\n\n\u201cPray, my lord,\u201d said Memnon, \u201cwithout women and without eating, how\ndo you spend your time?\u201d\n\n\u201cIn watching over the other worlds that are entrusted to us, and I am\nnow come to give you consolation.\u201d\n\n\u201cAlas!\u201d replied Memnon, \u201cwhy did you not come yesterday to hinder me\nfrom committing so many indiscretions?\u201d\n\n\u201cI was with your elder brother Hassan,\u201d said the celestial being. \u201cHe\nis still more to be pitied than you are. His most gracious majesty,\nthe sultan of the Indies, in whose court he has the honor to serve,\nhas caused both his eyes to be put out for some small indiscretion,\nand he is now in a dungeon, his hands and feet loaded with chains.\u201d\n\n\u201cTis a happy thing, truly,\u201d said Memnon, \u201cto have a good genius in\none\u2019s family, when out of two brothers, one is blind of an eye,\nthe other blind of both; one stretched upon straw, the other in a\ndungeon.\u201d\n\n\u201cYour fate will soon change,\u201d said the spirit of the star. \u201cIt is\ntrue you will never recover your eye, but, except that, you may be\nsufficiently happy if you never again take it into your head to be a\nperfect philosopher.\u201d\n\n\u201cIs it, then, impossible?\u201d said Memnon.\n\n\u201cAs impossible as to be perfectly wise, perfectly strong, perfectly\npowerful, perfectly happy. We ourselves are very far from it. There\nis a world, indeed, where all this takes place; but, in the hundred\nthousand millions of worlds dispersed over the regions of space,\neverything goes on by degrees. There is less philosophy and less\nenjoyment in the second than in the first, less in the third than in\nthe second, and so forth till the last in the scale, where all are\ncompletely fools.\u201d\n\n\u201cI am afraid,\u201d said Memnon, \u201cthat our little terraqueous globe here\nis the madhouse of those hundred thousand millions of worlds of which\nyour lordship does me the honor to speak.\u201d\n\n\u201cNot quite,\u201d said the spirit, \u201cbut very nearly; everything must be in\nits proper place.\u201d\n\n\u201cBut are those poets and philosophers wrong, then, who tell us that\neverything is for the best?\u201d\n\n\u201cNo, they are right, when we consider things in relation to the\ngradation of the whole universe.\u201d\n\n\u201cOh! I shall never believe it till I recover my eye again,\u201d said the\nunfortunate Memnon.\n\n\n\n\n PLATO\u2019S DREAM.\n\n\nPlato was a great dreamer, as many others have been since his\ntime. He dreamed that mankind were formerly double, and that, as a\npunishment for their crimes, they were divided into male and female.\n\nHe undertook to prove that there can be no more than five perfect\nworlds, because there are but five regular mathematical bodies. His\nrepublic was one of his principal dreams. He dreamed, moreover, that\nwatching arises from sleep, and sleep from watching, and that a\nperson who should attempt to look at an eclipse otherwise than in a\npail of water would surely lose his sight. Dreams were at that time\nin great repute.\n\nHere follows one of his dreams, which is not one of the least\ninteresting. He thought that the great Demiurgos, the eternal\ngeometer, having peopled the immensity of space with innumerable\nglobes, was willing to make a trial of the knowledge of the genii\nwho had been witnesses of his works. He gave to each of them a small\nportion of matter to arrange, nearly in the same manner as Phidias\nand Zeuxis would have given their scholars a statue to carve or a\npicture to paint, if we may be allowed to compare small things to\ngreat.\n\nDemogorgon had for his lot the lump of mould which we call the earth,\nand, having formed it such as it now appears, he thought he had\nexecuted a masterpiece. He imagined he had silenced Envy herself, and\nexpected to receive the highest panegyrics, even from his brethren;\nbut how great was his surprise, when, at his next appearing among\nthem, they received him with a general hiss.\n\nOne among them, more satirical than the rest, accosted him thus:\n\n\u201cTruly you have performed mighty feats! you have divided your world\ninto two parts; and, to prevent the one from communication with the\nother, you have carefully placed a vast collection of waters between\nthe two hemispheres. The inhabitants must perish with cold under both\nyour poles and be scorched to death under the equator. You have, in\nyour great prudence, formed immense deserts of sand, so that all who\ntravel over them may die with hunger and thirst. I have no fault to\nfind with your cows, your sheep, your cocks, and your hens, but can\nnever be reconciled to your serpents and your spiders. Your onions\nand your artichokes are very good things, but I cannot conceive what\ninduced you to scatter such a heap of poisonous plants over the face\nof the earth, unless it was to poison its inhabitants. Moreover, if\nI am not mistaken, you have created about thirty different kinds\nof monkeys, a still greater number of dogs, and only four or five\nspecies of the human race. It is true, indeed, you have bestowed\non the latter of these animals a faculty by you called reason, but,\nin truth, this same reason is a very ridiculous thing, and borders\nvery near upon folly. Besides, you do not seem to have shown any\nvery great regard to this two-legged creature, seeing you have left\nhim with so few means of defence, subjected him to so many disorders\nand provided him with so few remedies, and formed him with such a\nmultitude of passions and so small a portion of wisdom or prudence to\nresist them. You certainly were not willing that there should remain\nany great number of these animals on the earth at once, for, without\nreckoning the dangers to which you have exposed them, you have so\nordered matters that, taking every day throughout the year, smallpox\nwill regularly carry off the tenth part of the species, and sister\nmaladies will taint the springs of life in the nine remaining parts;\nand then, as if this were not sufficient, you have so disposed things\nthat one-half of those who survive will be occupied in going to law\nwith each other or cutting one another\u2019s throats.\n\n\u201cNow, they must doubtless be under infinite obligations to you, and\nit must be owned you have executed a masterpiece.\u201d\n\nDemogorgon blushed. He was sensible there was much moral and physical\nevil in this affair, but still he insisted there was more good than\nill in it.\n\n\u201cIt is an easy matter to find fault, good folks,\u201d said the genius,\n\u201cbut do you imagine it is so easy to form an animal, who, having the\ngift of reason and free-will, shall not sometimes abuse his liberty?\nDo you think that, in rearing between nine and ten thousand different\nplants, it is so easy to prevent some few from having noxious\nqualities? Do you suppose that with a certain quantity of water,\nsand, and mud you could make a globe that should have neither seas\nnor deserts?\n\n\u201cAs for you, my sneering friend, I think you have just finished the\nplanet Jupiter. Let us see now what figure you make with your great\nbelts and your long nights with four moons to enlighten them. Let us\nexamine your worlds and see whether the inhabitants you have made are\nexempt from follies or diseases.\u201d\n\nAccordingly the genius fell to examining the planet Jupiter, when\nthe laugh went strongly against the laugher. The serious genius who\nhad made the planet Saturn did not escape without his share of the\ncensure, and his brother operators, the makers of Mars, Mercury, and\nVenus, had each in his turn some reproaches to undergo.\n\nSeveral large volumes and a great number of pamphlets were written on\nthis occasion; smart sayings and witty repartees flew about on all\nsides; they railed against and ridiculed each other, and, in short,\nthe disputes were carried on with all the warmth of party heat, when\nthe eternal Demiurgos thus imposed silence on them all:\n\n\u201cIn your several performances there is both good and bad, because you\nhave a great share of understanding, but at the same time fall short\nof perfection. Your works will not endure above a hundred millions of\nyears, after which you will acquire more knowledge and perform much\nbetter. It belongs to me alone to create things perfect and immortal.\u201d\n\nThis was the doctrine Plato taught his disciples. One of them, when\nhe had finished his harangue, cried out: \u201cAnd so you then awoke?\u201d\n\n\n\n\n AN ADVENTURE IN INDIA.\n\n\nAll the world knows that Pythagoras, while he resided in India,\nattended the school of the Gymnosophists and learned the language of\nbeasts and plants. One day while he was walking in a meadow near the\nsea-shore he heard these words:\n\n\u201cHow unfortunate that I was born an herb! I scarcely attain two\ninches in height, when a voracious monster, a horrid animal, tramples\nme under his large feet; his jaws are armed with rows of sharp\nscythes, by which he cuts, then grinds, and then swallows me. Men\ncall this monster a sheep. I do not suppose there is in the whole\ncreation a more detestable creature.\u201d\n\nPythagoras proceeded a little way and found an oyster yawning on a\nsmall rock. He had not yet adopted that admirable law by which we are\nenjoined not to eat those animals which have a resemblance to us. He\nhad scarcely taken up the oyster to swallow it, when it spoke these\naffecting words:\n\n\u201cO Nature, how happy is the herb, which is, as I am, thy work! Though\nit be cut down, it is regenerated and immortal, and we, poor oysters,\nin vain are defended by a double cuirass; villains eat us by dozens\nat their breakfast, and all is over with us forever. What a horrible\nfate is that of an oyster, and how barbarous are men!\u201d\n\nPythagoras shuddered; he felt the enormity of the crime he had nearly\ncommitted; he begged pardon of the oyster, with tears in his eyes,\nand replaced it very carefully on the rock.\n\nAs he was returning to the city, profoundly meditating on this\nadventure, he saw spiders devouring flies; swallows eating spiders,\nand sparrow-hawks eating swallows. \u201cNone of these,\u201d said he, \u201care\nphilosophers.\u201d\n\nOn his entrance, Pythagoras was stunned, bruised, and thrown down by\na lot of tatterdemalions, who were running and crying: \u201cWell done, he\nfully deserved it.\u201d \u201cWho? What?\u201d said Pythagoras, as he was getting\nup. The people continued running and crying: \u201cOh, how delightful it\nwill be to see them boiled!\u201d\n\nPythagoras supposed they meant lentils or some other vegetables, but\nhe was in error; they meant two poor Indians. \u201cOh!\u201d said Pythagoras,\n\u201cthese Indians, without doubt, are two great philosophers weary of\ntheir lives; they are desirous of regenerating under other forms; it\naffords pleasure to a man to change his place of residence, though he\nmay be but indifferently lodged; there is no disputing on taste.\u201d\n\nHe proceeded with the mob to the public square, where he perceived\na lighted pile of wood and a bench opposite to it, which was called\na tribunal. On this bench judges were seated, each of whom had a\ncow\u2019s tail in his hand and a cap on his head, with ears resembling\nthose of the animal which bore Silenus when he came into that country\nwith Bacchus, after having crossed the Erytrean sea without wetting\na foot, and stopping the sun and moon, as it is recorded with great\nfidelity by the Orphics.\n\nAmong these judges there was an honest man with whom Pythagoras was\nacquainted. The Indian sage explained to the sage of Samos the nature\nof that festival to be given to the people of India.\n\n\u201cThese two Indians,\u201d said he, \u201chave not the least desire to be\ncommitted to the flames. My grave brethren have adjudged them to\nbe burnt; one for saying that the substance of Xaca is not that of\nBrahma, and the other for supposing that the approbation of the\nSupreme Being was to be obtained at the point of death without\nholding a cow by the tail. \u2018Because,\u2019 said he, \u2018we may be virtuous\nat all times, and we cannot always have a cow to lay hold of just\nwhen we may have occasion.\u2019 The good women of the city were greatly\nterrified at two such heretical opinions; they would not allow the\njudges a moment\u2019s peace until they had ordered the execution of those\nunfortunate men.\u201d\n\nPythagoras was convinced that from the herb up to man there were\nmany causes of chagrin. However, he obliged the judges and even the\ndevotees to listen to reason, which happened only at that time.\n\nHe went afterwards and preached toleration at Crotona; but a bigot\nset fire to his house, and he was burned\u2014the man who had delivered\nthe two Hindoos from the flames! Let those save themselves who can!\n\n\n\n\n BABABEC.\n\n\nWhen I was in the city of Benares, on the borders of the Ganges, the\ncountry of the ancient Brahmins, I endeavored to instruct myself\nin their religion and manners. I understood the Indian language\ntolerably well. I heard a great deal and remarked everything. I\nlodged at the house of my correspondent, Omri, who was the most\nworthy man I ever knew. He was of the religion of the Brahmins; I\nhave the honor to be a Mussulman. We never exchanged one word higher\nthan another about Mahomet or Brahma. We performed our ablutions each\non his own side; we drank of the same sherbet, and we ate of the same\nrice, as if we had been two brothers.\n\nOne day we went together to the pagoda of Gavani. There we saw\nseveral bands of fakirs, some of whom were janguis, that is to say,\ncontemplative fakirs, and others were disciples of the ancient\nGymnosophists, who led an active life. They all have a learned\nlanguage peculiar to themselves; it is that of the most ancient\nBrahmins; and they have a book written in this language, which they\ncall the \u201c_Shasta_.\u201d It is, beyond all contradiction, the most\nancient book in all Asia, not excepting the \u201c_Zend_.\u201d\n\nI happened by chance to cross in front of a fakir who was reading in\nthis book.\n\n\u201cAh! wretched infidel!\u201d cried he, \u201cthou hast made me lose a number of\nvowels that I was counting, which will cause my soul to pass into the\nbody of a hare instead of that of a parrot, with which I had before\nthe greatest reason to flatter myself.\u201d\n\nI gave him a rupee to comfort him for the accident. In going a few\npaces farther I had the misfortune to sneeze. The noise I made roused\na fakir, who was in a trance.\n\n\u201cHeavens!\u201d cried he, \u201cwhat a dreadful noise. Where am I? I can no\nlonger see the tip of my nose\u2014the heavenly light has disappeared.\u201d\n\n\u201cIf I am the cause,\u201d said I, \u201cof your not seeing farther than the\nlength of your nose, here is a rupee to repair the great injury I\nhave done you. Squint again, my friend, and resume the heavenly\nlight.\u201d\n\nHaving thus brought myself off discreetly enough, I passed over to\nthe side of the Gymnosophists, several of whom brought me a parcel\nof mighty pretty nails to drive into my arms and thighs, in honor\nof Brahma. I bought their nails and made use of them to fasten down\nmy boxes. Others were dancing upon their hands, others cut capers\non the slack rope, and others went always upon one foot. There were\nsome who dragged a heavy chain about with them, and others carried a\npacksaddle; some had their heads always in a bushel\u2014the best people\nin the world to live with. My friend Omri took me to the cell of one\nof the most famous of these. His name was Bababec; he was as naked\nas he was born, and had a great chain about his neck that weighed\nupwards of sixty pounds. He sat on a wooden chair, very neatly\ndecorated with little points of nails that penetrated into his flesh,\nand you would have thought he had been sitting on a velvet cushion.\nNumbers of women flocked to him to consult him. He was the oracle of\nall the families in the neighborhood, and was, truly speaking, in\ngreat reputation. I was witness to a long conversation that Omri had\nwith him.\n\n\u201cDo you think, father,\u201d said my friend, \u201cthat after having gone\nthrough seven metempsychoses, I may at length arrive at the\nhabitation of Brahma?\u201d\n\n\u201cThat is as it may happen,\u201d said the fakir. \u201cWhat sort of life do you\nlead?\u201d\n\n\u201cI endeavor,\u201d answered Omri, \u201cto be a good subject, a good husband,\na good father, and a good friend. I lend money without interest to\nthe rich who want it, and I give it to the poor; I always strive to\npreserve peace among my neighbors.\u201d\n\n\u201cBut have you ever run nails into your flesh?\u201d demanded the Brahmin.\n\n\u201cNever, reverend father.\u201d\n\n\u201cI am sorry for it,\u201d replied the father, \u201cvery sorry for it, indeed.\nIt is a thousand pities, but you will certainly not reach above the\nnineteenth heaven.\u201d\n\n\u201cNo higher!\u201d said Omri. \u201cIn truth, I am very well contented with\nmy lot. What is it to me whether I go into the nineteenth or the\ntwentieth, provided I do my duty in my pilgrimage, and am well\nreceived at the end of my journey? Is it not as much as one can\ndesire to live with a fair character in this world and be happy with\nBrahma in the next? And pray what heaven do you think of going to,\ngood master Bababec, with your chain?\u201d\n\n\u201cInto the thirty-fifth,\u201d said Bababec.\n\n\u201cI admire your modesty,\u201d replied Omri, \u201cto pretend to be better\nlodged than me. This is surely the result of an excessive ambition.\nHow can you, who condemn others that covet honors in this world,\narrogate such distinguished ones to yourself in the next? What right\nhave you to be better treated than me? Know that I bestow more alms\nto the poor in ten days than the nails you run into your flesh cost\nfor ten years. What is it to Brahma that you pass the whole day stark\nnaked with a chain about your neck? This is doing a notable service\nto your country, doubtless! I have a thousand times more esteem for\nthe man who sows pulse or plants trees than for all your tribe, who\nlook at the tips of their noses or carry packsaddles to show their\nmagnanimity.\u201d\n\nHaving finished this speech, Omri softened his voice, embraced the\nBrahmin, and, with an endearing sweetness, besought him to throw\naside his nails and his chain, to go home with him and live with\ndecency and comfort.\n\nThe fakir was persuaded: he was washed clean, rubbed with essences\nand perfumes and clad in a decent habit; he lived a fortnight in this\nmanner, behaved with prudence and wisdom and acknowledged that he was\na thousand times happier than before; but he lost his credit among\nthe people; the women no longer crowded to consult him; he therefore\nquitted the house of the friendly Omri and returned to his nails and\nhis chain\u2014to regain his reputation.\n\n\n\n\n ANCIENT FAITH AND FABLE.\n\n\nIn order to be successful in their efforts to govern the multitude,\nrulers have endeavored to instil all the visionary notions possible\ninto the minds of their subjects.\n\nThe good people who read Virgil, or the \u201cProvincial Letters,\u201d do\nnot know that there are twenty times more copies of the \u201cAlmanac of\nLi\u00e8ge\u201d and of the \u201c_Courier Boiteux_\u201d printed than of all the ancient\nand modern books together. No one can have a greater admiration\nthan myself for the illustrious authors of these almanacs and their\nbrethren. I know that ever since the time of the ancient Chald\u00e6ans\nthere have been fixed and stated days for taking physic, paring our\nnails, giving battle, and cleaving wood. I know that the best part of\nthe revenue of an illustrious academy consists in the sale of these\nalmanacs. May I presume to ask, with all possible submission and a\nbecoming diffidence of my own judgment, what harm it would do to the\nworld if some powerful astrologer were to assure the peasants and the\ngood inhabitants of little villages that they might safely pare their\nnails when they please, provided it be done with a good intention?\nThe people, I shall be told, would not buy the almanacs of this new\nastrologer. On the contrary, I will venture to affirm that there\nwould be found among your great geniuses many who would make a merit\nin following this novelty. Should it be alleged, however, that these\ngeniuses, in their new-born zeal, would form factions and kindle a\ncivil war, I would have nothing further to say on the subject, but\nreadily give up for the sake of peace my too radical and dangerous\nopinion.\n\nEverybody knows the king of Boutan. He is one of the greatest princes\nin the universe. He tramples under his feet the thrones of the earth,\nand his shoes (if he has any) are provided with sceptres instead\nof buckles. He adores the devil, as is well known, and his example\nis followed by all his courtiers. He one day sent for a famous\nsculptor of my country and ordered him to make a beautiful statue\nof Beelzebub. The sculptor succeeded admirably. Never before was\nthere seen such an interesting and handsome devil. But, unhappily,\nour Praxiteles had only given five clutches to his statue, whereas\nthe devout Boutaniers always gave him six. This serious blunder of\nthe artist was attributed by the grand master of ceremonies to the\ndevil with all the zeal of a man justly jealous of his master\u2019s\nacknowledged rights, and also of the established and sacred customs\nof the kingdom of Boutan. He insisted that the sculptor should be\npunished for his thoughtless innovation, by the loss of his head. The\nanxious sculptor explained that his five clutches were exactly equal\nin weight to six ordinary clutches; and the king of Boutan, who was\na prince of great clemency, granted him a pardon. From that time the\npeople of Boutan no longer believed the dogma relating to the devil\u2019s\nsix clutches.\n\nThe same day it was thought necessary that his majesty should be\nbled, and a surgeon of Gascony, who had come to his court in a ship\nbelonging to our East India company, was appointed to take from him\nfive ounces of his precious blood. The astrologer of that quarter\ncried out that the king would be in danger of losing his life if the\nsurgeon opened a vein while the heavens were in their present state.\nThe Gascon might have told him that the only question was about the\nking\u2019s health; but he prudently waited a few moments, and then,\ntaking an almanac in his hand, thus addressed the astrologer:\n\n\u201cYou were in the right, great man! The king would have died had he\nbeen bled at the instant you mentioned, but the heavens have since\nchanged their aspect, and now is the favorable moment.\u201d\n\nThe astrologer assented to the surgeon\u2019s observation. The king was\ncured; and by degrees it became an established custom among the\nBoutaniers to bleed their kings whenever it was considered necessary.\n\nAlthough the Indian astrologers understood the method of calculating\neclipses, yet the common people obstinately held to the old belief\nthat the sun, when obscured, had fallen into the throat of a great\ndragon, and that the only way to free him from thence was by standing\nnaked in the water and making a hideous noise to frighten away the\nmonster, and oblige him to release his hold. This notion, which is\nquite prevalent among the orientals, is an evident proof how much the\nsymbols of religion and natural philosophy have at all times been\nperverted by the common people. The astronomers of all ages have been\nwont to distinguish the two points of intersection, upon which every\neclipse happens, and which are called the lunar nodes, by marking\nthem with a dragon\u2019s head and tail. Now the vulgar, who are equally\nignorant in every part of the world, took the symbol or sign for\nthe thing itself. Thus, when the astronomers said the sun is in the\ndragon\u2019s head, the common people said the dragon is going to swallow\nup the sun; and yet these people were remarkable for their fondness\nfor astrology. But while we laugh at the ignorance and credulity of\nthe Indians, we do not reflect that there are no less than 300,000\nalmanacs sold yearly in Europe, all of them filled with observations\nand predictions equally as false and absurd as any to be met with\namong the Indians. It is surely as reasonable to say that the sun is\nin the mouth or the claws of a dragon as to tell people every year\nin print that they must not sow, nor plant, nor take physic, nor be\nbled, but on certain days of the moon. It is high time, in an age\nlike ours, that some men of learning should think it worth their\nwhile to compose a calendar that might be of use to the industrious\nclasses by instructing instead of deceiving them.\n\nA blustering Dominican at Rome said to an English philosopher with\nwhom he was disputing:\n\n\u201cYou are a dog; you say that it is the earth that turns round, never\nreflecting that Joshua made the sun to stand still!\u201d\n\n\u201cWell! my reverend father,\u201d replied the philosopher, \u201cever since that\ntime has not the sun been immovable?\u201d\n\nThe dog and the Dominican embraced each other, and even the devout\nItalians were at length convinced that the earth turns round.\n\nAn augur and a senator lamented, in the time of C\u00e6sar, the declining\nstate of the republic.\n\n\u201cThe times, indeed, are very bad,\u201d said the senator; \u201cwe have reason\nto tremble for the liberty of Rome.\u201d\n\n\u201cAh!\u201d said the augur, \u201cthat is not the greatest evil; the people now\nbegin to lose the respect which they formerly had for our order. We\nseem barely to be tolerated\u2014we cease to be necessary. Some generals\nhave the assurance to give battle without consulting us. And, to\ncomplete our misfortunes, even those who sell us the sacred pullets\nbegin to reason.\u201d\n\n\u201cWell, and why don\u2019t you reason likewise?\u201d replied the senator, \u201cand\nsince the dealers in pullets in the time of C\u00e6sar are more knowing\nthan they were in the time of Numa, ought not you modern augurs to be\nbetter philosophers than those who lived in former ages?\u201d\n\n\n\n\n THE TWO COMFORTERS.\n\n\nThe great philosopher Citosile once said to a woman who was\ndisconsolate, and who had good reason to be so: \u201cMadame, the queen\nof England, daughter to Henry IV., was as wretched as you. She was\nbanished from her kingdom, was in great danger of losing her life at\nsea, and saw her royal spouse expire on a scaffold.\u201d\n\n\u201cI am sorry for her,\u201d said the lady, and began again to lament her\nown misfortunes.\n\n\u201cBut,\u201d said Citosile, \u201cremember the fate of Mary Stuart. She loved\n(but with a most chaste and virtuous affection) an excellent\nmusician, who played admirably on the bass-viol. Her husband killed\nher musician before her face; and in the sequel her good friend and\nrelative, Queen Elizabeth, who called herself a virgin, caused her\nhead to be cut off on a scaffold covered with black, after having\nconfined her in prison for the space of eighteen years.\u201d\n\n\u201cThat was very cruel,\u201d replied the lady, and presently relapsed into\nher former melancholy.\n\n\u201cPerhaps,\u201d said the comforter, \u201cyou have heard of the beautiful Joan\nof Naples, who was taken prisoner and strangled.\u201d\n\n\u201cI have a dim remembrance of her,\u201d said the afflicted lady.\n\n\u201cI must relate to you,\u201d continued the other, \u201cthe adventure of a\nsovereign princess who, within my recollection, was dethroned after\nsupper and who died on a desert island.\u201d\n\n\u201cI know her whole history,\u201d replied the lady.\n\n\u201cWell, then,\u201d said Citosile, \u201cI will tell you what happened to\nanother great princess whom I instructed in philosophy. She had\na lover, as all great and beautiful princesses have. Her father\nsurprised this lover in her company, and was so displeased with\nthe young man\u2019s confused manner and excited countenance that he\ngave him one of the most terrible blows that had ever been given in\nhis province. The lover seized a pair of tongs and broke the head\nof the angry parent, who was cured with great difficulty, and who\nstill bears the marks of the wound. The lady in a fright leaped out\nof the window and dislocated her foot, in consequence of which she\nhabitually halts, though still possessed in other respects of a very\nhandsome person. The lover was condemned to death for having broken\nthe head of a great prince. You can imagine in what a deplorable\ncondition the princess must have been when her lover was led to the\ngallows. I have seen her long ago when she was in prison, and she\nalways spoke to me of her own misfortunes.\u201d\n\n\u201cAnd why will you not allow me to think of mine?\u201d said the lady.\n\n[Illustration: SO MANY GREAT LADIES HAVE BEEN SO UNFORTUNATE, IT ILL\nBECOMES YOU TO DESPAIR]\n\n\u201cBecause,\u201d said the philosopher, \u201cyou ought not to think of\nthem; and since so many great ladies have been so unfortunate, it ill\nbecomes you to despair. Think of Hecuba\u2014think of Niobe.\u201d\n\n\u201cAh!\u201d said the lady, \u201chad I lived in their time, or in that of so\nmany beautiful princesses, and had you endeavored to console them by\na relation of my misfortunes, would they have listened to you, do you\nimagine?\u201d\n\nNext day the philosopher lost his only son, and was entirely\nprostrated with grief. The lady caused a catalogue to be drawn up\nof all the kings who had lost their children, and carried it to the\nphilosopher. He read it\u2014found it very exact\u2014and wept nevertheless.\n\nThree months afterwards they chanced to renew their acquaintance,\nand were mutually surprised to find each other in such a gay and\nsprightly humor. To commemorate this event, they caused to be erected\na beautiful statue to Time, with this inscription: \u201cTO HIM WHO\nCOMFORTS.\u201d\n\n\n\n\n A DIALOGUE  BETWEEN\n MARCUS AURELIUS AND\n A RECOLLET FRIAR.\n\n\nMARCUS AURELIUS.\u2014Now I think I begin to know where I am. That\u2019s\ncertainly the capitol, and that basilica, the temple. The person I\nbehold there is undoubtedly the priest of Jupiter. Hark ye, friend;\none word with you, if you please.\n\nFRIAR.\u2014Friend! very familiar, truly: you must certainly be a stranger\nin Rome, to accost in this manner brother Fulgentius the recollet, an\ninhabitant of the capitol, confessor to the duchess de Popoli, and\nwho speaks sometimes to the pope, with as much familiarity as if he\nwere a mere mortal.\n\nMARCUS AURELIUS.\u2014Brother Fulgentius in the capitol! Matters are\nsomewhat changed indeed. I don\u2019t understand one word you say. Is\nthere no such place here as the temple of Jupiter?\n\nFRIAR.\u2014Get you gone about your business, honest friend; you seem to\nbe out of your senses. Who are you, prithee, with your antique dress\nand your Jew\u2019s beard? Whence come you, and what do you want here?\n\nMARCUS AURELIUS.\u2014This is my ordinary apparel: I am come back to see\nRome once more. My name is Marcus Aurelius.\n\nFRIAR.\u2014Marcus Aurelius! I think I remember to have heard of such a\nname. If I don\u2019t mistake, there was a Pagan emperor so called.\n\nMARCUS AURELIUS.\u2014I am he. I longed to have another view of that Rome\nwhich I loved, and which was so fond of me; that capitol in which I\ntriumphed by my contempt of triumph; that land I formerly rendered\nso happy: but now I can hardly think it to be the same place. I have\nbeen to see the column that was erected to my honor, and have not\nbeen able to find the statue of the sage Antonine, my father. The\nface is quite altered from what it was.\n\nFRIAR.\u2014So it ought, M. Damned Soul. Sixtus V. erected that column;\nbut then he put on it a better man than you and your father to boot.\n\nMARCUS AURELIUS.\u2014I was always of opinion it was no difficult matter\nto excel me; but I thought it no such easy affair to surpass my\nfather. Perhaps my piety towards him has imposed on my judgment. All\nmen are liable to error. But why give me the epithet of Damned Soul?\n\nFRIAR.\u2014Because so you are. Was it not you\u2014let me see, I don\u2019t\nmistake\u2014that so often persecuted a set of folks, to whom you lay\nunder very great obligations, and who procured you a shower of rain\nwhich enabled you to thrash your enemies?\n\nMARCUS AURELIUS.\u2014Alas! I was very far from persecuting any one. I\nthank Heaven, by a very happy conjuncture, a storm happened, just in\nthe nick of time, to save my troops, who were dying of thirst; but\nI never heard before that I owed the favor of this tempest to the\nfolks you mention, though, to tell you the truth, they were very good\nsoldiers. I assure you, in the most solemn manner, I am not damned:\nI have done too much good to mankind, that the Divine Being should\ndo me any evil. But, prithee tell me, where is the palace of the\nemperor, my successor? Is it still on the Palatine hill? For really I\nhardly know my own country again.\n\nFRIAR.\u2014I believe it, truly, we have so improved everything. If you\nplease, I will carry you to Monte Cavallo: you shall have the honor\nto kiss the great toe of St. Peter; and you will, besides, receive a\nhandsome present of indulgences, which, in my humble opinion, will be\nvery seasonable; for I don\u2019t doubt you stand in great need of them.\n\nMARCUS AURELIUS.\u2014First of all, I desire you would grant me your own;\nand tell me ingenuously, is there an end of the emperors and empire\nof Rome?\n\nFRIAR.\u2014No, no, by no means; there is still an empire and an emperor;\nbut then he keeps his court at the distance of about four hundred\nleagues hence, at a small city called Vienna, on the Danube. My\nadvice is, that you go there to pay a visit to your successors;\nbecause here you stand a great chance to visit the inquisition. I\nwarn you that the reverend Dominican fathers are not at all disposed\nto jest in such matters, and that your Marcus Aureliuses, your\nAntonines, your Trajans, and your Tituses, and such gentry as cannot\nsay their catechism, are treated by them after a very scurvy manner.\n\nMARCUS AURELIUS.\u2014The catechism! the inquisition! Dominicans!\nRecollets! a pope and cardinals! and the Roman Empire in a little\ncity on the Danube! I could never have dreamt of such things; though\nI will allow, that in sixteen hundred years things will change\nstrangely in this world of ours. I could like, methinks, to see one\nof these Roman emperors, Marcoman, Quadus, Cimber, and Teuto.\n\nFRIAR.\u2014You shall not want that pleasure when you please, and a\ngreater than that still. You would, in all likelihood, be surprised,\nwere I to tell you that the Scythians hold one half of your empire,\nand we the other: that the sovereign of Rome is a priest like me:\nthat brother Fulgentius may be that sovereign in his turn: that I\nshall disperse indulgences on the very spot where you were wont to be\ndrawn in your car by vanquished sovereigns: and, lastly, that your\nsuccessor on the Danube has not a city he can call his own; but that\nthere is a certain priest that lets him have the use of his capital,\nwhen he has occasion for it.\n\nMARCUS AURELIUS.\u2014You tell me strange news, indeed. All these great\nchanges could never have happened without great misfortunes. I own I\nstill love the human race, and am heartily sorry for them.\n\nFRIAR.\u2014You are too good. These revolutions have really cost a deluge\nof blood, and a hundred provinces have been ravaged; but had it not\nbeen so, your servant, brother Fulgentius, had never slept at his\nease in the capitol.\n\nMARCUS AURELIUS.\u2014Rome, that metropolis of the universe, is then most\nmiserably fallen.\n\nFRIAR.\u2014Fallen, I grant you; but as for miserably, there I must\nsay you nay: on the contrary, peace and the fine arts flourish\nhere eternally. The ancient masters of the world are now become\nmusic-masters. Instead of sending colonies into England, we now send\nthem eunuchs and fiddlers. We have, it is true, none of your Scipios\nnow, those destroyers of Carthage; but then we have none of your\nproscriptions neither. We have bartered glory for tranquillity.\n\nMARCUS AURELIUS.\u2014I tried what I could to become a philosopher in\nmy life-time, but now I am sure I have become one indeed. I find\ntranquillity is at the least an equivalent for glory: but, by what\nyou tell me, I should be apt to suspect brother Fulgentius is no\nadept in philosophy.\n\nFRIAR.\u2014What do you mean? Not a philosopher! I am one with a\nvengeance. I once taught philosophy; nay, better still, I read\nlectures in theology.\n\nMARCUS AURELIUS.\u2014And, pray, what may this theology of yours be, an\u2019t\nplease you?\n\nFRIAR.\u2014Why, it is\u2014it is that which has made me be here, and the\nemperor elsewhere. You seem to grudge me the honor I enjoy, and are\nout of humor at the trifling revolution that has happened to your\nempire.\n\nMARCUS AURELIUS.\u2014I adore the eternal decrees of Providence: I know\nman ought not to repine at fate: I admire the vicissitude of human\naffairs; but since everything is so liable to change, and since the\nRoman Empire has experienced this wonderful mutability, let me hope\nthe recollets may also experience it in their turn.\n\nFRIAR.\u2014I declare you anathematized: but hold, now I think on\u2019t, it is\ntime to go to matins.\n\nMARCUS AURELIUS.\u2014And I will go and be reunited to the Being of\nBeings.\n\n\n\n\n DIALOGUE\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0BETWEEN\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0A\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0BRAHMIN\n   AND A JESUIT, ON NECESSITY AND\n   FREE-WILL, \u00a0\u00a0AND\u00a0 THE \u00a0GENERAL\n   CONCATENATION \u00a0OF\u00a0 CAUSES \u00a0AND\n   EFFECTS.\n\nJESUIT.\u2014In all probability, you are indebted to the prayers of St.\nFrancis Xavier for that long and happy life you have enjoyed a\nhundred and fourscore years! Why, \u2019tis a life-time for a patriarch.\n\nBRAHMIN.\u2014My master, Fonfouca, lived till three hundred; it is the\nordinary course of life among us Brahmins. I have a very great regard\nfor Francis Xavier; but all his prayers would never have put nature\nout of her destined order: had he really been able to prolong the\nlife of a gnat but for one single instant beyond what the general\nconcatenation of causes and events allows of, this globe of ours had\nworn a quite different appearance from that in which you now behold\nit.\n\nJESUIT.\u2014You have a strange opinion of future contingents: why, you\nmust be entirely ignorant that man is free, and that our free-will\ndisposes of everything in this sublunary world at its mere fancy and\npleasure. I can assure you the Jesuits alone have contributed not a\nlittle to some very considerable revolutions.\n\nBRAHMIN.\u2014I have no manner of question in regard to the learning and\npower of the reverend fathers, the Jesuits: they are a very valuable\npart of human society; yet I cannot by any means believe them the\nsovereign arbiters of human transactions: every single person, every\nsingle being, whether Jesuit or Brahmin, is one of the springs which\nact in the general movement of the universe; in which he is the\nslave, and not the master of destiny. Pray, to what do you think\nGenghis Khan owed the conquest of Asia? To the very moment in which\nhis father one day happened to awake as he was in bed with his wife;\nto a word which a Tartar chanced to let fall some years before. I,\nfor example, the very person you behold, am one of the chief causes\nof the deplorable death of Henry IV., for which, you may see, I am\nstill much afflicted.\n\nJESUIT.\u2014Your reverence is pleased to be very merry upon the matter?\nYou the cause of the death of Henry IV.!\n\nBRAHMIN.\u2014Alas! it is too true. This happened in the nine hundred and\neighty-three thousandth year of the revolution of Saturn, which makes\nthe fifteen hundred and fiftieth of your era. I was then young and\ngiddy headed. I thought proper, upon a time, to take a walk, which I\nbegan with moving my left foot first, on the coast of Malabar, whence\nmost evidently followed the death of Henry IV.\n\nJESUIT.\u2014How so, prithee? For, as to our society, who were accused\nwith having had a large share in that affair, we had not the least\nknowledge of it.\n\nBRAHMIN.\u2014I\u2019ll tell ye how fate thought proper to order the matter.\nBy moving my left foot, as I told you, I unluckily tumbled my friend\nEriban, the Persian merchant, into the water, and he was drowned. My\nfriend, it seems, had a very handsome wife, that ran away with an\nArmenian merchant: this lady had a daughter, who married a Greek; the\ndaughter of this Greek settled in France, and married the father of\nRavaillac. Now, had not every tittle of this happened exactly as it\ndid, you are very sensible the affairs of the houses of France and\nAustria would have turned out in a very different manner. The system\nof Europe would have been entirely changed. The wars between Turkey\nand the German Empire would have had quite another issue; which issue\nwould have had an effect on Persia, as well as Persia on the East\nIndies; so you see it is plain to a demonstration, that the whole\ndepended on my left foot, which was connected with all the other\nevents of the universe, past, present, and to come.\n\nJESUIT.\u2014I must have this affair laid before some of our fathers, who\nare theologians.\n\nBRAHMIN.\u2014In the meantime, I will tell you, father, that\nthe maid-servant of the grandfather of the founder of the\n_Feuillants_\u2014for you must know I have dipped into your histories\u2014was\nlikewise one principal cause of the death of Henry IV., and of all\nthe accidents which it produced.\n\nJESUIT.\u2014This servant-maid must then have been a domineering quean!\n\nBRAHMIN.\u2014Oh fie! no such thing. She was a mere idiot, by whom her\nmaster had a child. Madame de la Barri\u00e8re, poor soul, died of grief\nat it. She who succeeded her was, as your chronicles tell, the\ngrandmother of the blessed John de la Barri\u00e8re, who founded the order\nof _Feuillants_. Ravaillac was a monk of this order. With them he\nsucked in a certain doctrine very fashionable in those days, as you\nwell enough know. This doctrine taught him to believe that the most\nmeritorious thing he could possibly do was to assassinate the best\nking in the whole world. What followed is known to everybody.\n\nJESUIT.\u2014In spite of your left foot, and the wench of the grandfather\nof the founder of the _Feuillants_, I shall ever be of opinion that\nthe horrible action committed by Ravaillac was a future contingent,\nwhich might very well not have happened: for, after all, man is\ncertainly a free agent.\n\nBRAHMIN.\u2014I do not know what you mean by a free agent. I can affix no\ncertain idea to these words. To be free, is to do whatever we think\nproper, and not to will whatever we please. All I know of the matter\nis, that Ravaillac voluntarily committed the crime, of which he was\ndestined by fate to be the instrument. This crime was no more than a\nlink of the great chain of destiny.\n\nJESUIT.\u2014You may say what you will, but the affairs of this world are\nfar from having any such dependence as you are pleased to think.\nWhat signifies, for example, this useless conversation of ours, here\non the shores of the East Indies?\n\nBRAHMIN.\u2014What you and I say in conversation is doubtless sufficiently\ninsignificant; but, for all that, were you not here, the machine of\nthe universe would be extremely changed from what it is.\n\nJESUIT.\u2014There your Brahmin reverence is pleased to advance a huge\nparadox truly.\n\nBRAHMIN.\u2014Your Ignatian fathership may believe me or no, as you\nlike it. But assuredly, we should never have had this conversation\ntogether, had you not come into the East Indies. You had never made\nthis voyage, had not your St. Ignatius de Loyola been wounded at the\nsiege of Pampeluna, or had not the king of Portugal persisted in\ndiscovering the passage round the Cape of Good Hope. Now, prithee,\ndid not the king of Portugal, with the help of the compass, entirely\nchange the face of this world of ours? But it was first of all\nnecessary that a certain Neapolitan should make this discovery of the\ncompass; now tell me, if you have the face, that everything is not\nwholly subservient to one constant and uniform tenor of action; which\nby indissoluble, but invisible, concatenation, unites all that lives,\nor acts, or dies, or suffers on the surface of our globe?\n\nJESUIT.\u2014What then would become of our future contingents?\n\nBRAHMIN.\u2014What care I what become of them? but yet the order\nestablished by the hand of an eternal and almighty God must certainly\nexist forever.\n\nJESUIT.\u2014Were one to listen to you, we ought not to pray to God at all.\n\nBRAHMIN.\u2014It is our duty to adore Him. But pray what mean ye by\npraying to God?\n\nJESUIT.\u2014What all the world means by it, to be sure: that He would\ngrant our petitions, and favor us in all our wants.\n\nBRAHMIN.\u2014I understand you. You mean, that a gardener might obtain\nclear sunshine weather, at a time which God had ordained from all\neternity to produce rains; and that a pilot should have an easterly\nwind, when a westerly wind ought to refresh the earth, as well as the\nseas? My good father, to pray as we ought is to submit one\u2019s self\nwholly to Providence. So good evening to you. Destiny requires I\nshould now visit my Brahminess.\n\nJESUIT.\u2014And my free-will urges me to give a lesson to a young\nscholar.\n\n\n\n\n DIALOGUES BETWEEN\n     LUCRETIUS AND\n     POSIDONIUS.\n\n\n FIRST COLLOQUY.\n\nPOSIDONIUS.\u2014Your poetry is sometimes admirable; but the philosophy of\nEpicurus is, in my opinion, very bad.\n\nLUCRETIUS.\u2014What! will you not allow that the atoms, of their own\naccord, disposed themselves in such a manner as to produce the\nuniverse?\n\nPOSIDONIUS.\u2014We mathematicians can admit nothing but what is proved by\nincontestable principles.\n\nLUCRETIUS.\u2014My principles are so.\n\n _Ex nihilo nihil, in nihilum nil posse reverti._\n _Tangere enim & tangi nisi corpus nulla potest res._\n\n From nothing nought can spring, to nothing nought return.\n Nought but a body can a body touch.\n\nPOSIDONIUS.\u2014Should I grant you these principles, and even your atoms\nand your vacuum, you can no more persuade me that the universe put\nitself into the admirable order in which we now behold it, than if\nyou were to tell the Romans that the armillary sphere composed by\nPosidonius made itself.\n\nLUCRETIUS.\u2014But who then could make the world?\n\nPOSIDONIUS.\u2014An intelligent Being, much more superior to the world\nand to me than I am to the brass of which I made my sphere.\n\nLUCRETIUS.\u2014How can you, who admit nothing but what is evident,\nacknowledge a principle of which you have not the least idea?\n\nPOSIDONIUS.\u2014In the same manner as, before I knew you, I judged that\nyour book was the work of a man of genius.\n\nLUCRETIUS.\u2014You allow that nature is eternal, and exists because it\ndoes exist. Now if it exists by its own power, why may it not, by the\nsame power, have formed suns, and worlds, and plants, and animals,\nand men?\n\nPOSIDONIUS.\u2014All the ancient philosophers have supposed matter to be\neternal, but have never proved it to be really so; and even allowing\nit to be eternal, it would by no means follow that it could form\nworks in which there are so many striking proofs of wisdom and\ndesign. Suppose this stone to be eternal if you will, you can never\npersuade me that it could have composed the \u201cIliad\u201d of Homer.\n\nLUCRETIUS.\u2014No: a stone could never have composed the \u201cIliad,\u201d any\nmore than it could have produced a horse: but matter organized in\nprocess of time, and become bones, flesh, and blood, will produce a\nhorse; and organized more finely, will produce the \u201cIliad.\u201d\n\nPOSIDONIUS.\u2014You suppose all this without any proof; and I ought to\nadmit nothing without proof. I will give you bones, flesh, and blood,\nready made, and will leave you and all the Epicureans in the world\nto make your best of them. Will you only consent to this alternative:\nto be put in possession of the whole Roman Empire, if, with all the\ningredients ready prepared, you produce a horse, and to be hanged if\nyou fail in the attempt?\n\nLUCRETIUS.\u2014No; that surpasses my power, but not the power of nature.\nIt requires millions of ages for nature, after having passed through\nall the possible forms, to arrive at last at the only one which can\nproduce living beings.\n\nPOSIDONIUS.\u2014You might, if you pleased, continue all your lifetime to\nshake in a cask all the materials of the earth mixed together, you\nwould never be able to form any regular figure; you could produce\nnothing. If the length of your life is not sufficient to produce even\na mushroom, will the length of another man\u2019s life be sufficient for\nthat purpose? Why should several ages be able to effect what one age\nhas not effected? One ought to have seen men and animals spring from\nthe bosom of the earth, and corn produced without seed, etc., before\nhe should venture to affirm that matter, by its own energy, could\ngive itself such forms; but no one that I know of has seen such an\noperation, and therefore no one ought to believe it.\n\nLUCRETIUS.\u2014Well! men, animals, and trees must always have existed.\nAll the philosophers allow that matter is eternal; and they must\nfurther allow, that generations are so likewise. It is the very\nnature of matter that there should be stars that revolve, birds that\nfly, horses that run, and men that compose \u201cIliads.\u201d\n\nPOSIDONIUS.\u2014In this new supposition you change your opinion; but you\nalways suppose the point in question, and admit a thing for which you\nhave not the least proof.\n\nLUCRETIUS.\u2014I am at liberty to believe that what is to-day was\nyesterday, was a century ago, was a hundred centuries ago, and so on\nbackwards without end. I make use of your argument: no one has ever\nseen the sun and stars begin their course, nor the first animals\nformed and endowed with life. We may, therefore, safely believe that\nall things were from eternity as they are at present.\n\nPOSIDONIUS.\u2014There is a very great difference. I see an admirable\ndesign, and I ought to believe that an intelligent being formed that\ndesign.\n\nLUCRETIUS.\u2014You ought not to admit a being of whom you have no\nknowledge.\n\nPOSIDONIUS.\u2014You might as well tell me that I should not believe that\nan architect built the capitol because I never saw that architect.\n\nLUCRETIUS.\u2014Your comparison is not just. You have seen houses built,\nand you have seen architects; and therefore you ought to conclude\nthat it was a man like our present architects that built the capitol.\nBut here the case is very different: the capitol does not exist of\nitself, but matter does. It must necessarily have had some form; and\nwhy will you not allow it to possess, by its own energy, the form in\nwhich it now is? Is it not much easier for you to admit that nature\nmodifies itself, than to acknowledge a being that modifies it? In the\nformer case you have only one difficulty to encounter, namely, to\ncomprehend how nature acts. In the latter you have two difficulties\nto surmount: to comprehend this same nature, and the visible being\nthat acts on it.\n\nPOSIDONIUS.\u2014It is quite the reverse. I see not only a difficulty, but\neven an impossibility in comprehending how matter can have infinite\ndesigns; but I see no difficulty in admitting an intelligent being,\nwho governs this matter by his infinite wisdom, and by his almighty\nwill.\n\nLUCRETIUS.\u2014What? is it because your mind cannot comprehend one thing\nthat you are to suppose another? Is it because you do not understand\nthe secret springs, and admirable contrivances, by which nature\ndisposed itself into planets, suns, and animals, that you have\nrecourse to another being?\n\nPOSIDONIUS.\u2014No; I have not recourse to a god, because I cannot\ncomprehend nature; but I plainly perceive that nature needs a supreme\nintelligence; and this reason alone would to me be a sufficient proof\nof a deity had I no other.\n\nLUCRETIUS.\u2014And what if this matter possessed intelligence of itself?\n\nPOSIDONIUS.\u2014It is plain to me that it does not possess it.\n\nLUCRETIUS.\u2014And to me it is plain that it does possess it, since I see\nbodies like you and me reason.\n\nPOSIDONIUS.\u2014If matter possesses, of itself, the faculty of thinking,\nyou must affirm that it possesses it necessarily and independently:\nbut if this property be essential to matter, it must have it at\nall times and in all places; for whatever is essential to a thing\ncan never be separated from it. A bit of clay, and even the vilest\nexcrement would think; but sure you will not say that dung thinks.\nThought, therefore, is not an essential attribute of matter.\n\nLUCRETIUS.\u2014Your reasoning is a mere sophism. I hold motion to be\nessential to matter; and yet this dung, or that piece of clay, is not\nactually in motion; but they will be so when they are impelled by\nsome other body. In like manner thought will not be an attribute of a\nbody, except when that body is organized for thinking.\n\nPOSIDONIUS.\u2014Your error proceeds from this, that you always suppose\nthe point in question. You do not reflect that, in order to organize\na body, to make it a man, to render it a thinking being, there must\npreviously be thought, there must be a fixed design. But you cannot\nadmit such a thing as design before the only beings in this world\ncapable of design are formed; you cannot admit thought before the\nonly beings capable of thinking exist. You likewise suppose the\npoint in question, when you say that motion is necessary to matter;\nfor what is absolutely necessary always exists, as extension, for\ninstance, exists always and in every part of matter; but motion does\nnot exist always. The pyramids of Egypt are not surely in motion.\nA subtile matter perhaps, may penetrate between the stones which\ncompose the pyramids; but the body of the pyramid is immovable.\nMotion, therefore, is not essential to matter, but is communicated to\nit by a foreign cause, in the same manner as thought is to men. Hence\nit follows that there must be a powerful and intelligent being, who\ncommunicates motion, life, and thought to his creatures.\n\nLUCRETIUS.\u2014I can easily answer your objections by saying that there\nhave always been motion and intelligence in the world. This motion\nand this intelligence have been distributed at all times according to\nthe laws of nature. Matter being eternal, it must necessarily have\nbeen in some order; but it could not be put into any order without\nthought and motion; and therefore thought and motion must have always\nbeen inherent in it.\n\nPOSIDONIUS.\u2014Do what you will, you can at best but make suppositions.\nYou suppose an order; there must, therefore, have been some\nintelligent mind who formed this order. You suppose motion and\nthought before matter was in motion, and before there were men and\nthoughts. You must allow, that thought is not essential to matter,\nsince you dare not say that a flint thinks. You can oppose nothing\nbut a _perhaps_ to the truth that presses hard upon you. You are\nsensible of the weakness of matter, and are forced to admit a\nsupreme intelligent and almighty being, who organized matter and\nthinking beings. The designs of this superior intelligence shine\nforth in every part of nature, and you must perceive them as\ndistinctly in a blade of grass, as in the course of the stars.\nEverything is evidently directed to a certain end.\n\nLUCRETIUS.\u2014But do you not take for a design what is only a necessary\nexistence? Do you not take for an end what is no more than the use\nwhich we make of things that exist? The Argonauts built a ship to\nsail to Colchis. Will you say that the trees were created in order\nthat the Argonauts might build a ship, and that the sea was made to\nenable them to undertake their voyage? Men wear stockings: will you\nsay that legs were made by the Supreme Being in order to be covered\nwith stockings? No, doubtless; but the Argonauts, having seen wood,\nbuilt a ship with it, and having learned that the water could carry\na ship, they undertook their voyage. In the same manner, after an\ninfinite number of forms and combinations which matter had assumed,\nit was found that the humors, and the transparent horn which compose\nthe eye, and which were formerly separated in different parts of\nthe body, were united in the head, and animals began to see. The\norgans of generation, dispersed before, were likewise collected, and\ntook the form they now have; and then all kinds of procreation were\nconducted with regularity. The matter of the sun, which had been\nlong diffused and scattered through the universe, was conglobated,\nand formed the luminary that enlightens our world. Is there anything\nimpossible in all this?\n\nPOSIDONIUS.\u2014In fact, you cannot surely be serious when you have\nrecourse to such a system: for, in the first place, if you adopt this\nhypothesis, you must, of course, reject the eternal generations of\nwhich you have just now been talking: and, in the second place, you\nare mistaken with regard to final causes. There are voluntary uses to\nwhich we apply the gifts of nature; and there are likewise necessary\neffects. The Argonauts need not, unless they had pleased, have\nemployed the trees of the forest to build a ship; but these trees\nwere plainly destined to grow on the earth, and to produce fruits and\nleaves. We need not cover our legs with stockings; but the leg was\nevidently made to support the body, and to walk, the eyes to see, the\nears to hear, and the parts of generation to perpetuate the species.\nIf you consider that a star, placed at the distance of four or five\nhundred millions of leagues from us, sends forth rays of light, which\nmake precisely the same angle in the eyes of every animal, and that,\nat that instant, all animals have the sensation of light, you must\nacknowledge that this is an instance of the most admirable mechanism\nand design. But is it not unreasonable to admit mechanism without a\nmechanic, a design without intelligence, and such designs without a\nSupreme Being?\n\nLUCRETIUS.\u2014If I admit the Supreme Being, what form must I give Him?\nIs He in one place? Is He out of all place? Is He in time or out\nof time? Does He fill the whole of space, or does He not fill it?\nWhy did He make the world? What was His end in making it? Why form\nsensible and unhappy beings? Why moral and natural evil? On whatever\nside I turn my mind, everything appears dark and incomprehensible.\n\nPOSIDONIUS.\u2014\u2019Tis a necessary consequence of the existence of this\nSupreme Being that His nature should be incomprehensible; for, if\nHe exists, there must be an infinite distance between Him and us.\nWe ought to believe that He is, without endeavoring to know what\nHe is, or how He operates. Are you not obliged to admit asymptotes\nin geometry, without comprehending how it is possible for the same\nlines to be always approaching, and yet never to meet? Are there not\nmany things as incomprehensible as demonstrable, in the properties\nof the circle? Confess, therefore, that you ought to admit what is\nincomprehensible, when the existence of that incomprehensible is\nproved.\n\nLUCRETIUS.\u2014What! must I renounce the dogmas of Epicurus?\n\nPOSIDONIUS.\u2014It is better to renounce Epicurus than to abandon the\ndictates of reason.\n\n\n SECOND COLLOQUY.\n\nLUCRETIUS.\u2014I begin to recognize a Supreme Being, inaccessible to our\nsenses, and proved by our reason, who made the world, and preserves\nit; but with regard to what I have said of the soul, in my third\nbook, which has been so much admired by all the learned men of Rome,\nI hardly think you can oblige me to alter my opinion.\n\nPOSIDONIUS.\u2014You say: \u201c_Idque situm media regione in pectoris\nh\u00e6ret._\u201d\u2014\u201cThe mind is in the middle of the breast.\u201d\u2014But, when you\ncomposed your beautiful verses, did you never make any effort of the\nhead? When you speak of the orators Cicero and Mark Antony, do you\nnot say that they had good heads? And were you to say that they had\ngood breasts, would not people imagine that you were talking of their\nvoice and lungs?\n\nLUCRETIUS.\u2014Are you not convinced, from experience, that the feelings\nof joy, of sorrow, and of fear, are formed about the heart?\n\n _Hic exultat enim pavor ac metus; h\u00e6c loca circum L\u00e6titi\u00e6 mulcent._\n\n For there our passions live, our joy, our fear, And hope.\n\nDo you not feel your heart dilate or contract itself on the hearing\nof good or bad news? Is it not possessed of some secret springs of a\nyielding and elastic quality? This, therefore, must be the seat of\nthe soul.\n\nPOSIDONIUS.\u2014There are two nerves which proceed from the brain, pass\nthrough the heart and stomach, reach to the parts of generation, and\ncommunicate motion to them; but would you therefore say, that the\nhuman mind resides in the parts of generation?\n\nLUCRETIUS.\u2014No; I dare not say so. But though I should place the soul\nin the head, instead of placing it in the breast, my principles will\nstill subsist: the soul will still be an infinitely subtile matter,\nresembling the elementary fire that animates the whole machine.\n\nPOSIDONIUS.\u2014And why do you imagine that a subtile matter can have\nthoughts and sentiments of itself?\n\nLUCRETIUS.\u2014Because I experience it; because all the parts of my body,\nwhen touched, presently feel the impression; because this feeling is\ndiffused through my whole machine; because it could not be diffused\nthrough it but by a matter of a very subtile nature, and of a very\nrapid motion; because I am a body, and one body cannot be affected\nbut by another; because the interior part of my body could not be\npenetrated but by very small corpuscles; and, in consequence, my soul\nmust be an assemblage of these corpuscles.\n\nPOSIDONIUS.\u2014We have already agreed, in our first colloquy, that it\nis extremely improbable that a rock could compose the \u201cIliad.\u201d Will\na ray of the sun be more capable of composing it? Suppose this ray a\nhundred thousand times more subtile and rapid than usual, will this\nlight, or this tenuity of parts, produce thoughts and sentiments?\n\nLUCRETIUS.\u2014Perhaps it may, when placed in organs properly prepared.\n\nPOSIDONIUS.\u2014You are perpetually reduced to your _perhaps_. Fire, of\nitself, is no more capable of thinking than ice. Should I suppose\nthat it is fire that thinks, perceives, and wills in you, you would\nthen be forced to acknowledge that it is not by its own virtue that\nit has either will, thought, or perception.\n\nLUCRETIUS.\u2014No; these sensations will be produced not by its own\nvirtue, but by the assemblage of the fire, and of my organs.\n\nPOSIDONIUS.\u2014How can you imagine that two bodies, neither of which can\nthink apart, should be able to produce thought, when joined together?\n\nLUCRETIUS.\u2014In the same manner as a tree and earth, when taken\nseparately, do not produce fruit, but do so when the tree is planted\nin the earth.\n\nPOSIDONIUS.\u2014The comparison is only specious. This tree has in it\nthe seeds of fruit: we plainly perceive them in the buds, and the\nmoisture of the earth unfolds the substance of these fruits. Fire,\ntherefore, must possess in itself the seeds of thought, and the\norgans of the body serve only to develop these seeds.\n\nLUCRETIUS.\u2014And do you find anything impossible in this?\n\nPOSIDONIUS.\u2014I find that this fire, this highly refined matter, is\nas devoid of the faculty of thinking as a stone. The production of\na being must have something similar to that which produced it; but\nthought, will, and perception have nothing similar to fiery matter.\n\nLUCRETIUS.\u2014Two bodies, struck against each other, produce motion,\nand yet this motion has nothing similar to the two bodies; it has\nnone of their three dimensions, nor has it any figure. A being,\ntherefore, may have nothing similar to that which produced it, and,\nin consequence, thought may spring from an assemblage of two bodies\nwhich have no thought.\n\nPOSIDONIUS.\u2014This comparison likewise is more specious than just. I\nsee nothing but matter in two bodies in motion: I only see bodies\npassing from one place to another. But when we reason together I see\nno matter in your ideas, or in my own. I shall only observe that I\ncan no more conceive how one body has the power of moving another,\nthan I can comprehend the manner of my having ideas. To me both are\nequally inexplicable, and both equally prove the existence and the\npower of a Supreme Being, the author of thought and motion.\n\nLUCRETIUS.\u2014If our soul is not a subtile fire, an ethereal\nquintessence, what is it?\n\nPOSIDONIUS.\u2014Neither you nor I know aught of the matter. I will tell\nyou plainly what it is not; but I cannot tell you what it actually\nis. I see that it is a power lodged in my body; that I did not give\nmyself this power; and, in consequence, that it must have come from\na Being superior to myself.\n\nLUCRETIUS.\u2014You did not give yourself life; you received it from your\nfather; from whom, likewise, together with life, you received the\nfaculty of thinking, as he had received both from his father, and so\non backwards to infinity. You no more know the true principle of life\nthan you do that of thought. This succession of living and thinking\nbeings has always existed.\n\nPOSIDONIUS.\u2014I plainly see that you are always obliged to abandon the\nsystem of Epicurus, and that you dare no longer maintain that the\ndeclination of atoms produced thought. I have already, in our last\ncolloquy, refuted the eternal succession of sensible and thinking\nbeings. I showed you that, if there are material beings capable of\nthinking by their own power, thought must necessarily be an attribute\nessential to all matter; that, if matter thought necessarily, and\nby its own virtue, all matter must of course think: but this is not\nthe case, and therefore it is impossible to maintain a succession of\nmaterial beings, who, of themselves, possess the faculty of thinking.\n\nLUCRETIUS.\u2014Notwithstanding this reasoning, which you repeat, it is\ncertain that a father communicates a soul to his son at the same time\nthat he forms his body. This soul and this body grow together; they\ngradually acquire strength; they are subject to calamities, and to\nthe infirmities of old age. The decay of our strength draws along\nwith it that of our judgment; the effect at last ceases with the\ncause, and the soul vanishes like smoke into air.\n\n _Pr\u00e6terea, gigni pariter cum corpore, & una_\n _Crescere sentimus, pariterque senescere mentem._\n _Nam velet infirmo pueri, teneroque vagantur_\n _Corpore, sic animi sequitur sententia tenuis._\n _Inde ubi robustis adolevit viribus \u00e6tas,_\n _Consilium quoque majus, & auctior est animi vis._\n _Post ubi jam validis quassatum est viribus \u00e6vi_\n _Corpus, & obtusis ceciderunt viribus artus:_\n _Claudicat ingenium delirat linguaque, mensque;_\n _Omnia deficiunt, atque uno tempore desunt,_\n _Ergo dissolvi quoque convenit omnem animai_\n _Naturam, ceu fumus in altas aeris auras:_\n _Quandoquidem gigni pariter, pariterque videmus_\n _Crescere, & (ut docui) simul \u00e6vo fessa fatiscit._\n\n Besides, \u2019tis plain that souls are born, and grow;\n And all by age decay, as bodies do;\n To prove this truth: in infants, minds appear\n Infirm, and tender as their bodies are:\n In man, the mind is strong; when age prevails,\n And the quick vigor of each member fails,\n The mind\u2019s powers, too, decrease, and waste apace;\n And grave and reverend folly takes the place.\n \u2019Tis likely then the soul and mind must die;\n Like smoke in air, its scattered atoms fly;\n Since all these proofs have shown, these reasons told,\n \u2019Tis with the body born, grows strong, and old.\n                                           \u2014CREECH.\n\nPOSIDONIUS.\u2014These, to be sure, are very fine verses; but do you\nthereby inform me of the nature of the soul?\n\nLUCRETIUS.\u2014No; I only give you its history, and I reason with\nprobability.\n\nPOSIDONIUS.\u2014Where is the probability of a father\u2019s communicating to\nhis son the faculty of thinking?\n\nLUCRETIUS.\u2014Do you not daily see children resembling their fathers in\ntheir inclinations, as well as in their features?\n\nPOSIDONIUS.\u2014But does not a father, in begetting his son, act as a\nblind agent? Does he pretend, when he enjoys his wife, to make a\nsoul, or to make thoughts? Do either of them know the manner in\nwhich a child is formed in the mother\u2019s womb? Must we not, in this\ncase, have recourse to a superior cause, as well as in all the other\noperations of nature which we have examined? Must you not see, if you\nare in earnest, that men give themselves nothing, but are under the\nhand of an absolute master?\n\nLUCRETIUS.\u2014If you know more of the matter than I do, tell me what the\nsoul is.\n\nPOSIDONIUS.\u2014I do not pretend to know what it is more than you. Let us\nendeavor to enlighten each other. Tell me, first, what is vegetation.\n\nLUCRETIUS.\u2014It is an internal motion, that carries the moisture of the\nearth into plants, makes them grow, unfolds their fruits, expands\ntheir leaves, etc.\n\nPOSIDONIUS.\u2014Surely you do not think that there is a being called\n_Vegetation_ that performs these wonders?\n\nLUCRETIUS.\u2014Who ever thought so?\n\nPOSIDONIUS.\u2014From our former colloquy you ought to conclude that the\ntree did not give vegetation to itself.\n\nLUCRETIUS.\u2014I am forced to allow it.\n\nPOSIDONIUS.\u2014Tell me next what life is.\n\nLUCRETIUS.\u2014It is vegetation joined with perception in an organized\nbody.\n\nPOSIDONIUS.\u2014And is there not a being called life, that gives\nperception to an organized body?\n\nLUCRETIUS.\u2014Doubtless vegetation and life are words which signify\nthings that live and vegetate.\n\nPOSIDONIUS.\u2014If a tree and an animal cannot give themselves life and\nvegetation, can you give yourself thoughts?\n\nLUCRETIUS.\u2014I think I can, for I think of whatever I please. My\nintention was to converse with you about metaphysics, and I have done\nso.\n\nPOSIDONIUS.\u2014You think that you are master of your ideas; do you know,\nthen, what thoughts you will have in an hour, or in a quarter of an\nhour?\n\nLUCRETIUS.\u2014I must own that I do not.\n\nPOSIDONIUS.\u2014You frequently have ideas in your sleep; you make verses\nin a dream: C\u00e6sar takes cities: I resolve problems; and hounds pursue\nthe stag in their dreams. Ideas, therefore, come to us independently\nof our own will; they are given us by a Superior Being.\n\nLUCRETIUS.\u2014In what manner do you mean? Do you suppose that the\nSupreme Being is continually employed in communicating ideas; or that\nhe created incorporeal substances, which were afterwards capable of\nforming ideas of themselves, sometimes with the assistance of the\nsenses, and sometimes without it? Are these substances formed at\nthe moment of the animal\u2019s conception? Or are they formed before its\nconception? Do they wait for bodies, in order to insinuate themselves\ninto them? or are they not lodged there till the animal is capable of\nreceiving them? Or, in fine, is it in the Supreme Being that every\nanimated being sees the ideas of things? What is your opinion?\n\nPOSIDONIUS.\u2014When you tell me how our will produces an instantaneous\nmotion in our bodies, how your arm obeys your will, how we receive\nlife, how food digests in the stomach, and how corn is transformed\ninto blood, I will then tell you how we have ideas. With regard to\nall these particulars I frankly confess my ignorance. The world,\nperhaps, may one day obtain new lights; but from the time of Thales\nto the present age we have not had any. All we can do is to be\nsensible of our own weakness, to acknowledge an Almighty Being, and\nto be upon our guard against these systems.\n\n\n\n\n DIALOGUE BETWEEN\n     A CLIENT AND\n     HIS LAWYER.\n\n\nCLIENT.\u2014Well, sir! with regard to the cause of those poor orphans?\n\nLAWYER.\u2014What do you mean? It is but eighteen years since their estate\nhas been in litigation.\n\nCLIENT.\u2014I don\u2019t complain of that trifling matter; I know the custom\nwell enough; I respect it, but how in the name of heaven comes it to\npass that you have been these three months soliciting a hearing and\nhave not yet obtained it?\n\nLAWYER.\u2014The reason is because you have not solicited an audience in\nperson in behalf of your pupils; you ought to have waited on the\njudge several different times, to entreat him to try your cause.\n\nCLIENT.\u2014It is their duty to do justice of their own accord without\nwaiting till it is asked them. He is a very great man that has it\nin his power to sit in judgment on men\u2019s lives and fortunes, but he\nis by no means so to desire that the miserable should wait in his\nantechamber. I do not go to our parson\u2019s levee to pray and beseech\nhim to have the goodness to sing high mass, why ought I then to\npetition my judge to discharge the function of his office? In short,\nafter so many and such tedious delays, are we at length going to be\nso happy as to have our cause tried to-day?\n\nLAWYER.\u2014Why yes, and there is great likelihood of your carrying a\nvery material point in your process; you have a very decisive article\nin \u201cCharondas\u201d on your side.\n\nCLIENT.\u2014This same Charondas was, in all probability, some\nlord-chancellor in the time of one of the kings of the first race who\nhas passed a law in favor of orphans?\n\nLAWYER.\u2014By no means, he is no more than a private person who has\ngiven his opinion in a great volume which nobody reads, but then your\nadvocate quotes him, the judges take it upon his credit, so there\u2019s\nyour cause gained in a trice.\n\nCLIENT.\u2014What! do you tell me the opinion of this Judge Charondas\npasses current for a law?\n\nLAWYER.\u2014But there is one devilish bad circumstance attends us. Turnet\nand Brodeau are both against us.\n\nCLIENT.\u2014These, I suppose, are two other legislators whose laws have\nmuch the same authority with those of that other hard-named gentleman.\n\nLAWYER.\u2014Yes, certainly, as it was impossible to explain the Roman law\nsufficiently in the present case the world took different sides of\nthe question.\n\nCLIENT.\u2014What the devil signifies it to bring in the Roman law in this\naffair? Do we live in the present age under Theodosius or Justinian?\n\nLAWYER.\u2014By no means, but our forefathers, you must know, had a\nprodigious passion for tilting and fox hunting; they ran all, as if\nthey were mad, to the Holy Land with their doxies. You will grant\nme that men in such a hurry of business of consequence could not be\nsupposed to have time on their hands to frame a complete body of\nuniversal jurisprudence.\n\nCLIENT.\u2014Aye, aye, I understand you. For want of laws of your own you\nare forced to beg of Charondas and Justinian to be so good as tell\nyou how you should proceed when an inheritance is to be divided.\n\nLAWYER.\u2014There you are mistaken, we have more laws than all Europe\nbesides; almost every city has a body of laws of its own.\n\nCLIENT.\u2014Your most obedient. Here\u2019s another miracle.\n\nLAWYER.\u2014Ah! had your wards been born at Guignes-la-Putain instead of\nbeing natives of Melun near Corbeil!\n\nCLIENT.\u2014Very well; what had happened then, for God\u2019s sake?\n\nLAWYER.\u2014You should have gained your cause as sure as two and two\nmake four, that\u2019s all, for at this same Guignes-la-Putain there is\na custom which is wholly in your favor; but were you to go but two\nleagues beyond this, you would then be in a very different situation.\n\nCLIENT.\u2014But pray are not Guignes and Melun both in France? And can\nanything be more absurd or horrible than to tell me that what\u2019s right\nin one village is wrong in another? By what fatal barbarity does\nit happen that people born in the same country do yet live under\ndifferent laws?\n\nLAWYER.\u2014The reason is, that formerly the inhabitants of Guignes and\nthose of Melun were not inhabitants of the same country: these two\nfine cities formed in the golden days of yore two distinct empires,\nand the august sovereign of Guignes, though a vassal to the king of\nFrance, gave laws to his own subjects. Those laws depended on the\ngood will and pleasure of his _major domo_, who, it seems, could\nnot read, so that they have been handed down by a most venerable\ntradition from father to son, so that the whole race of the barons de\nGuignes becoming extinct, to the irrecoverable loss of all mankind,\nthe conceits of their first lackeys still exist and are held for the\nfundamental law of the land. The case is exactly the same in every\nsix leagues in the whole kingdom, so that you change laws every time\nyou change horses, so you may judge what a taking we poor advocates\nare in when we are to plead, for instance, for an inhabitant of\nPoictou against an inhabitant of Auvergne.\n\nCLIENT.\u2014But these same men of Poictou, Auvergne, with your Guignes\ngentry, are they not all dressed in the same manner? Is it a harder\nmatter to use the same laws than it is to wear the same clothes? And\nsince it is evident the tailors and cobblers understand one another\nfrom one end of the kingdom to the other, why cannot the judges\nlearn of them, and follow so excellent an example?\n\nLAWYER.\u2014You desire a thing altogether as impossible as it would be to\nbring the nation to make use of one sort of weights and measures. Why\nwould you have the laws everywhere the same when you see the point is\ndifferent in all places? For my own part, after thinking till my head\nwas like to split, all I have been able to conclude for the soul of\nme, is this: That as the measure of Paris is different from that at\nSt. Denis, it follows that men\u2019s judgments must also be different in\nboth. The varieties of nature are infinite, and it would be wrong in\nus to endeavor to render uniform what she intends shall not be so.\n\nCLIENT.\u2014Yet, now I think on it, I have a strong notion the English\nhave but one sort of weight and measures.\n\nLAWYER.\u2014The English! aye. Why the English are mere barbarians; they\nhave, it is true, but one kind of measure, but, to make amends, they\nhave a score of different religions.\n\nCLIENT.\u2014There you mention something strange indeed! Is it possible\nthat a nation who live under the same laws, should not likewise live\nunder the same religion?\n\nLAWYER.\u2014It is; which makes it plain they are abandoned to their own\nreprobate understandings.\n\nCLIENT.\u2014But may not it also prove that they think laws made for\nregulating the external actions of men and religion the internal?\nPossibly the English, and other nations, were of opinion that laws\nrelated to the concernments of man with man and that religion\nregarded man\u2019s relation to God. I am sure I should never quarrel with\nan Anabaptist who should take it into his head to be christened at\nthirty years old, but I should be horridly offended with him should\nhe fail paying his bill of exchange. They who sin against God ought\nto be punished in the other world; they who sin against man ought to\nbe chastised in this.\n\nLAWYER.\u2014I understand nothing of all this. I am just going to plead\nyour cause.\n\nCLIENT.\u2014I wish to God you understood it better first.\n\n\n\n\n DIALOGUE\u00a0\u00a0BETWEEN\u00a0\u00a0MADAME\u00a0DE\n   MAINTENON AND MADEMOISELLE\n   DE L\u2019ENCLOS.[1]\n\n\nMADAME DE MAINTENON.\u2014\u2019Tis true, I did request you to come to see me\nprivately, perhaps you may think it was only to make a display of my\ngrandeur; by no means, I really meant it that I might receive in you\na real consolation\u2014\n\nMADEMOISELLE DE L\u2019ENCLOS.\u2014Consolation, madam! I must acknowledge\nthat, having never been favored with hearing of you since you were\ngrown great, I concluded you must be perfectly happy.\n\nMADAME DE MAINTENON.\u2014I have the good fortune to be thought so. There\nare people in the world who are satisfied with this, though, to be\nplain with you, it is not at all my case, I have always exceedingly\nregretted your company.\n\nMADEMOISELLE DE L\u2019ENCLOS.\u2014I understand you. In the midst of your\ngrandeur you were sensible of the want of friendship; and I, on\nthe other hand, who am entirely engrossed by friendship, never had\noccasion to wish for grandeur; but how then comes it to pass you\nforgot me so long?\n\nMADAME DE MAINTENON.\u2014You know the necessity I was under to seem at\nleast to forget you. Believe me, amidst all the misfortunes attached\nto my elevation I always considered this restraint the chief.\n\nMADEMOISELLE DE L\u2019ENCLOS.\u2014As for my part, I neither forget my former\npleasures nor my old friends; but if you are really unhappy, as you\nsay you are, you impose prodigiously on the whole world who believe\nyou otherwise.\n\nMADAME DE MAINTENON.\u2014I was the first person deceived in this manner\nmyself. If, while we were at supper together, in company with\nVillarfaux and Nantouillet at our little house the Tournelles,\nwhen the mediocrity of our fortune was scarce worth thinking of,\nsomebody had said, You will, before \u2019tis long, approach very near\nto the throne; the most powerful monarch in the world will soon\nmake you his sole confidante; all favors will pass through your\nhands; you will be regarded as a sovereign: if, said I, any one had\nmade me such predictions I should have answered, The accomplishment\nof this strange prognostication must certainly kill one with mere\nastonishment. The whole of it was actually accomplished. I felt some\nsurprise in the first moments but, in hoping for joy, I found myself\nentirely mistaken.\n\nMADEMOISELLE DE L\u2019ENCLOS.\u2014A philosopher might possibly believe this,\nbut the public will with great difficulty be brought to believe\nyou were dissatisfied, and should they really think so they would\ncertainly blame you for it.\n\nMADAME DE MAINTENON.\u2014The world must then be as much in the wrong as\nI was. This world of ours is a vast amphitheatre where every one is\nplaced on his bench by mere chance. They imagine the supreme degree\nof felicity to be on the uppermost benches. What an egregious mistake!\n\nMADEMOISELLE DE L\u2019ENCLOS.\u2014I take this mistake to be necessary to\nhuman nature: they would never give themselves any trouble about\ngetting higher were they not led by an opinion that happiness\nis placed above them. Both of us are acquainted with pleasures\ninfinitely less deceiving or fanciful, but, for Heaven\u2019s sake, how\ndid you contrive to be so exceedingly wretched on your exalted seat?\n\nMADAME DE MAINTENON.\u2014Alas! my dear Ninon! from the time I left off\ncalling you anything but Mademoiselle de l\u2019Enclos, I from that moment\nbegan to be less happy. It was decreed I must be a prude. This is\ntelling all in one word. My heart is empty, my mind under restraint.\nI make the first figure in France, but it is really no more than a\nfigure, a shadow! I live only a kind of borrowed life. Ah! did you\nbut know what a burden it must be to a drooping soul to animate\nanother soul or to amuse a mind no longer capable of amusement!\n\nMADEMOISELLE DE L\u2019ENCLOS.\u2014I easily guess the uneasiness of your\nsituation. I fear insulting you should I mention the reflection\nthat Ninon is happier at Paris in her little house with the Abb\u00e9 de\nCh\u00e2teauneuf, and some friends, than you at Versailles in the company\nof the most respectable personage in all Europe, who lays all his\npower at your feet. I am afraid to show you the superiority of my\nsituation; I know it is wrong to discover too sensible a relish of\nour felicity in the presence of the unhappy. Endeavor, madam, to\nbear the load of your grandeur with patience, try to forget that\ndelightful obscurity in which we formerly lived together, in the same\nmanner you have been obliged to forget your ancient friends. The\nsole remedy in your painful state is to avoid reflection as much as\npossible, crying out with the poet,\n\n _F\u00e9licit\u00e9 pass\u00e9e,_\n _Qui ne peut revenir,_\n _Tourment de ma pens\u00e9e,_\n _Que n\u2019ai-je en te perdant, perdu le souvenir!_\n\nTormenting thought of former happiness gone, never to return! Why,\nwhen I was bereft of the joy, did I not lose the remembrance of it\nalso!\n\nDrink of the river Lethe, and above all, comfort yourself with having\nbefore your eyes so many royal dames whose time lies as heavy on\ntheir hands as yours can do.\n\nMADAME DE MAINTENON.\u2014Ah, my dear! what felicity can one find in being\nalone? I would fain make a proposal to you but I am afraid to open\nmyself.\n\nMADEMOISELLE DE L\u2019ENCLOS.\u2014Indeed, madam, to be plain with you, you\nhave reason to be a little mistrustful, but take courage.\n\nMADAME DE MAINTENON.\u2014I mean that you will barter, at least in\nappearance, your philosophy for prudery, and then you will become a\ntruly respectable woman. You shall live with me in Versailles, you\nshall be more my friend than ever, and help me to support my present\ncondition.\n\nMADEMOISELLE DE L\u2019ENCLOS.\u2014I still have a great affection for you,\nmadam, but I must freely own to you I love myself still better, and\ncan never consent to turn hypocrite and render myself miserable\nforever because fortune has treated you cruelly.\n\nMADAME DE MAINTENON.\u2014Ah, cruel Ninon! you have a heart more hard than\neven the very courtiers themselves. Can you then abandon me without\nthe least remorse?\n\nMADEMOISELLE DE L\u2019ENCLOS.\u2014By no means; I am still but too sensible.\nYou really melt me, and, to convince you I have the same regard\nfor you as ever I now make you the last offer in my power; quit\nVersailles and come and live with me at the rues des Tournelles.\n\nMADAME DE MAINTENON.\u2014You pierce my very heart. I cannot be happy near\nthe throne, nor can I enjoy pleasure in a retired life. This is one\nof the fatal effects of living in a court.\n\nMADEMOISELLE DE L\u2019ENCLOS.\u2014There is no remedy for an incurable\ndisorder. I shall take the opinion of the philosophers who frequent\nmy house concerning your malady, but I cannot promise you they will\neffect impossibilities.\n\nMADAME DE MAINTENON.\u2014Good heavens! what a cruel situation! to behold\nmyself on the very pinnacle of greatness, to be worshipped as a\ndeity, and yet not to be able to taste of happiness!\n\nMADEMOISELLE DE L\u2019ENCLOS.\u2014Hold, my dear friend, I fancy there is\nsome mistake in this; you believe yourself unhappy merely on account\nof your greatness, but may not the misfortune proceed from another\ncause, that your eyes have no longer the same lustre, your appetite\nno longer so good, nor your relish for pleasures so lively as\nheretofore? You have lost your youth, beauty, and feelings; this,\nthis is your real misfortune. This is the reason why so many women\nturn devotees at fifty and so fly from one chagrin into the arms of\nanother.\n\nMADAME DE MAINTENON.\u2014But, after all, you have more years over your\nhead than I have and you are neither unhappy nor a devotee.\n\nMADEMOISELLE DE L\u2019ENCLOS.\u2014Let us understand each other. We ought not\nto imagine that at your age and mine we can enjoy complete happiness.\nIt requires a soul glowing with the most exquisite sensations and\nthe five senses in their highest perfection to taste this kind of\nfelicity. But with a few friends, a little philosophy, and liberty,\none may be as much at one\u2019s ease as this age will admit of. The mind\nis never unhappy but when out of its sphere. So e\u2019en take my advice\nand come and live with me and my philosophical friends.\n\nMADAME DE MAINTENON.\u2014I see two ministers of state coming this way.\nThey are very different company from philosophers, so fare you well,\nmy dear Ninon.\n\nMADEMOISELLE DE L\u2019ENCLOS.\u2014Adieu, illustrious unfortunate.\n\n\nFOOTNOTE\n\n[1] Madame de Maintenon and Mademoiselle Ninon de l\u2019Enclos had\nlived long together. The author has often heard the late Abb\u00e9 de\nCh\u00e2teauneuf say, that Madame de Maintenon had used her utmost\nendeavors to engage Ninon to turn nun, and to come and comfort her at\nVersailles.\n\n\n\n DIALOGUE BETWEEN A SAVAGE\n   AND A BACHELOR OF ARTS.\n\n\nA governor of Cayenne, having brought over with him a savage from\nGuiana, who had a great share of good natural understanding, and\nspoke French tolerably well; a bachelor of arts at Paris had the\nhonor of entering into the following conversation with him:\n\nBACHELOR.\u2014I suppose, Mr. Savage, you have seen a number of your\ncountry people who pass their lives all alone, for it is said that\nthis is the true way of living natural to man, and that society is\nonly an artificial depravity?\n\nSAVAGE.\u2014Indeed I never did see any of those people you speak of.\nMan appears to me to be born for society, as well as several other\nspecies of animals. Each species follows the dictates of its nature;\nas for us, we live all together in a community.\n\nBACHELOR.\u2014How! in community? Why, then, you have fine towns, and\ncities with walls, and kings who keep a court. You have shows,\nconvents, universities, libraries, and taverns, have you?\n\nSAVAGE.\u2014No; but have I not frequently heard it said that in your\ncontinent you have Arabians and Scythians who never knew anything of\nthese matters, and yet form considerable nations? Now we live like\nthese people; neighboring families assist each other. We inhabit a\nwarm climate, and so have very few necessities; we can easily procure\nourselves food; we marry; we get children; we bring them up, and\nthen we die. You see this is just the same as among you; some few\nceremonies excepted.\n\nBACHELOR.\u2014Why, my good sir, then you are not a savage?\n\nSAVAGE.\u2014I do not know what you mean by that word.\n\nBACHELOR.\u2014Nor, to tell you the truth, do I myself\u2014stay\u2014let me\nconsider a little\u2014Oh!\u2014a savage?\u2014Why\u2014a savage is\u2014what we call a\nsavage, is a man of a morose, unsociable disposition, who flies all\ncompany.\n\nSAVAGE.\u2014I have told you already that we live together in families.\n\nBACHELOR.\u2014We also give the name of savage to those beasts who are\nnot tamed, but roam wild about the forests; and from hence we have\ntransferred that appellation to men who inhabit the woods.\n\nSAVAGE.\u2014I go into the woods sometimes, as well as you do, to hunt.\n\nBACHELOR.\u2014Pray, now, do you think sometimes?\n\nSAVAGE.\u2014It is impossible to be without some sort of ideas.\n\nBACHELOR.\u2014I have a great curiosity to know what your ideas are. What\nthink you of man?\n\nSAVAGE.\u2014Think of him! Why, that he is a two-footed animal, who has\nthe faculty of reasoning, speaking, and who uses his hands much more\ndexterously than the monkey. I have seen several kinds of men, some\nwhite, like you, others copper-colored, like me, and others black,\nlike those that wait upon the governor of Cayenne. You have a beard,\nwe have none; the negroes have wool, you and I have hair. They say,\nthat in your more northerly climates the inhabitants have white hair,\nwhereas that of the Americans is black. This is all I know about man.\n\nBACHELOR.\u2014But your soul, my dear sir? your soul? what notion have you\nof that? whence comes it? what is it? what does it do? how does it\nact? where does it go?\n\nSAVAGE.\u2014I know nothing about all this, indeed; for I never saw the\nsoul.\n\nBACHELOR.\u2014Apropos; do you think that brutes are machines?\n\nSAVAGE.\u2014They appear to me to be organized machines, that have\nsentiment and memory.\n\nBACHELOR.\u2014Well; and pray now, Mr. Savage, what do you think that you,\nyou yourself, I say, possess above those brutes?\n\nSAVAGE.\u2014The gifts of an infinitely superior memory, a much greater\nshare of ideas, and, as I have already told you, a tongue capable\nof forming many more sounds than those of brutes; with hands more\nready at executing; and the faculty of laughing, which a long-winded\nargumentator always makes me exercise.\n\nBACHELOR.\u2014But tell me, if you please, how came you by all this? What\nis the nature of your mind? How does your soul animate your body? Do\nyou always think? Is your will free?\n\nSAVAGE.\u2014Here are a great number of questions; you ask me how I came\nto possess what God has given to man? You might as well ask me how I\nwas born? For certainly, since I am born a man, I must possess the\nthings that constitute a man in the same manner as a tree has its\nbark, roots, and leaves. You would have me to know what is the nature\nof my mind. I did not give it to myself, and therefore I cannot know\nwhat it is; and as to how my soul animates my body, I am as much a\nstranger to that, too; and, in my opinion, you must first have seen\nthe springs that put your watch in motion before you can tell how\nit shows the hour. You ask me if I always think? No, for sometimes\nI have half-formed ideas, in the same manner as I see objects at a\ndistance, confusedly; sometimes my ideas are much stronger, as I\ncan distinguish an object better when it is nearer to me; sometimes\nI have no ideas at all, as when I shut my eyes I can see nothing.\nLastly, you ask me, if my will is free? Here I do not understand you;\nthese are things with which you are perfectly well acquainted, no\ndoubt, therefore I shall be glad you will explain them to me.\n\nBACHELOR.\u2014Yes, yes, I have studied all these matters thoroughly; I\ncould talk to you about them for a month together without ceasing,\nin such a manner as would surpass your understanding. But tell me,\ndo you know good and evil, right and wrong? Do you know which is the\nbest form of government? which the best worship? what is the law of\nnations? the common law? the civil law? the canon law? Do you know\nthe names of the first man and woman who peopled America? Do you know\nthe reason why rain falls into the sea; and why you have no beard?\n\nSAVAGE.\u2014Upon my word, sir, you take rather too great advantage of the\nconfession I made just now, that man has a superior memory to the\nbrutes; for I can hardly recollect the many questions you have asked\nme; you talk of good and evil, right and wrong; now, I think that\nwhatever gives you pleasure, and does injury to no one, is very good\nand very right; that what injures our fellow-creatures, and gives us\nno pleasure, is abominable; and what gives us pleasure but, at the\nsame time, hurts others, may be good with respect to us for the time,\nbut it is in itself both dangerous to us, and very wrong in regard to\nothers.\n\nBACHELOR.\u2014And do you live in society with these maxims?\n\nSAVAGE.\u2014Yes, with our relatives and neighbors, and, without much\npain or vexation, we quietly attain our hundredth year; some indeed\nreach to a hundred and twenty, after which our bodies serve to\nfertilize the earth that has nourished us.\n\nBACHELOR.\u2014You seem to me to have a clear understanding, I would\nvery fain puzzle it. Let us dine together, after which we will\nphilosophize methodically.\n\n       *       *       *       *       *\n\nSAVAGE.\u2014I find that I have swallowed foods that are not made for me,\nnotwithstanding I have a good stomach; you have made me eat after my\nstomach was satisfied, and drink when I was no longer dry. My legs\nare not so firm under me as they were before dinner; my head feels\nheavy, and my ideas are confused. I never felt this diminution of my\nfaculties in my own country. For my part, I think the more a man puts\ninto his body here, the more he takes away from his understanding.\nPray, tell me, what is the reason of all this damage and disorder?\n\nBACHELOR.\u2014I will tell you. In the first place, as to what passes in\nyour legs, I know nothing about the matter, you must consult the\nphysicians about that; they will satisfy you in a trice. But I am\nperfectly well acquainted with how things go in your head. You must\nknow, then, that the soul being confined to no place, has fixed her\nseat either in the pineal gland, or callous body in the middle of the\nbrain. The animal spirits that rise from the stomach fly up to the\nsoul, which they cannot affect, they being matter and it immaterial.\nNow, as neither can act upon the other, therefore the soul takes\ntheir impression, and, as it is a simple principle, and consequently\nsubject to no change, therefore it suffers a change, and becomes\nheavy and dull when we eat too much; and this is the reason that so\nmany great men sleep after dinner.\n\nSAVAGE.\u2014What you tell me appears very ingenious and profound, but I\nshould take it as a favor if you would explain it to me in such a\nmanner as I might comprehend.\n\nBACHELOR.\u2014Why, I have told you everything that can be said upon\nthis weighty affair; but, to satisfy you, I will be a little more\nexplicit. Let us go step by step. First, then, do you know that this\nis the best of all possible worlds?\n\nSAVAGE.\u2014How! is it impossible for the Infinite Being to create\nanything better than what we now see?\n\nBACHELOR.\u2014Undoubtedly; for nothing can be better than what we see.\nIt is true, indeed, that mankind rob and murder each other, but they\nall the while extol equity and moderation. Several years ago they\nmassacred about twelve millions of your Americans, but then it was to\nmake the rest more reasonable. A famous calculator has proved that\nfrom a certain war of Troy, which you know nothing of, to the last\nwar in North America, which you do know something of, there have been\nkilled in pitched battles no less than five hundred and fifty-five\nmillion six hundred and fifty thousand men, without reckoning young\nchildren and women buried under the ruins of cities and towns which\nhave been set on fire; but this was all for the good of community;\nfour or five thousand dreadful maladies, to which mankind are\nsubject, teach us the true value of health; and the crimes that cover\nthe face of the earth greatly enhance the merit of religious men,\nof which I am one; you see that everything goes in the best manner\npossible, at least as to me.\n\nNow things could never be in this state of perfection, if the soul\nwas not placed in the pineal gland. For\u2014but let me take you along\nwith me in the argument. Let us go step by step. What notion have you\nof laws, and of the rule of right and wrong; of the _to Kalon_, as\nPlato calls it?\n\nSAVAGE.\u2014Well, but my good sir, while you talk of going step by step,\nyou speak to me of a hundred different things at a time.\n\nBACHELOR.\u2014Every one converses in this manner. But tell me who made\nthe laws in your country?\n\nSAVAGE.\u2014The public good.\n\nBACHELOR.\u2014That word _public good_ means a great deal. We have not any\nso expressive; pray, in what sense do you understand?\n\nSAVAGE.\u2014I understand by it that those who have a plantation of cocoa\ntrees or maize, have forbidden others to meddle with them, and that\nthose who had them not, are obliged to work, in order to have a\nright to eat part of them. Everything that I have seen, either in\nyour country or my own, teaches me that there can be no other spirit\nof the laws.\n\nBACHELOR.\u2014But as to women, Mr. Savage, women?\n\nSAVAGE.\u2014As to women, they please me when they are handsome and\nsweet-tempered; I prize them even before our cocoa trees; they are a\nfruit which we are not willing to have plucked by any but ourselves.\nA man has no more right to take my wife from me than to take my\nchild. However, I have heard it said, that there are people who will\nsuffer this; they have it certainly in their will; every one may do\nwhat he pleases with his own property.\n\nBACHELOR.\u2014But as to successors, legatees, heirs, and collateral\nkindred?\n\nSAVAGE.\u2014Every one must have a successor. I can no longer possess my\nfield when I am buried in it, I leave it to my son; if I have two,\nI divide it equally between them. I hear that among you Europeans,\nthere are several nations where the law gives the whole to the eldest\nchild, and nothing to the younger. It must have been sordid interest\nthat dictated such unequal and ridiculous laws. I suppose either the\nelder children made it themselves, or their fathers, who were willing\nthey should have the pre-eminence.\n\nBACHELOR.\u2014What body of laws appears to you the best?\n\nSAVAGE.\u2014Those in which the interests of mankind, my fellow\ncreatures, have been most consulted.\n\nBACHELOR.\u2014And where are such laws to be found?\n\nSAVAGE.\u2014In no place that I have ever heard of.\n\nBACHELOR.\u2014You must tell me from whence the inhabitants of your\ncountry first came? Who do you think first peopled America?\n\nSAVAGE.\u2014God\u2014whom else should we think?\n\nBACHELOR.\u2014That is no answer. I ask you from what country your people\nfirst came?\n\nSAVAGE.\u2014The same country from which our trees came; really the\nEuropeans appear to me a very pleasant kind of people, to pretend\nthat we can have nothing without them; we have just as much reason to\nsuppose ourselves your ancestors as you have to imagine yourselves\nours.\n\nBACHELOR.\u2014You are an obstinate little savage.\n\nSAVAGE.\u2014You a very babbling bachelor.\n\nBACHELOR.\u2014But, hark ye, Mr. Savage, one word more with you, if you\nplease. Do you think it right in Guiana to put those to death who are\nnot of the same opinion with yourselves?\n\nSAVAGE.\u2014Undoubtedly, provided you eat them afterwards.\n\nBACHELOR.\u2014Now you are joking. What do think of the constitution?\n\nSAVAGE.\u2014Your servant.\n\n\n\n\n A TREATISE ON TOLERATION.\n\n\n CHAPTER I.\n A BRIEF ACCOUNT OF THE DEATH OF JOHN CALAS.\n\nThe murder of John Calas, committed in Toulouse with the sword of\njustice, the 9th of March, 1762, is an event which, on account of its\nsingularity, calls for the attention of the present age, and that of\nposterity. We soon forget the crowd of victims who have fallen in the\ncourse of innumerable battles, not only because this is a destiny\ninevitably connected with a life of warfare, but because those who\nthus fell might also have given death to their enemies, and did not\nlose their lives till after having first stood in their own defence.\nWhere the danger and the advantage are equal, our wonder ceases, and\neven pity itself is in some measure lessened; but where the father of\nan innocent family is delivered up to the sword of error, prejudice,\nor enthusiasm, where the accused person has no other defence but his\nconscious virtue; where the arbiters of his destiny have nothing to\nhazard in putting him to death but the having been mistaken, and\nwhere they may murder with impunity under the sanction of a judicial\nprocess, then every one is ready to cry out, every one brings the\ncase home to himself, and sees with fear and trembling that no\nperson\u2019s life is in safety in a court erected to watch over the lives\nof the subject, the public unite in demanding vengeance.\n\nIn this strange affair, we find religion, self-murder and parricide\nblended. The object of inquiry was, whether a father and a mother\nhad murdered their own son with a view to please God, and whether a\nbrother had murdered his brother, or a friend his friend; or whether\nthe judges had to reproach themselves with having publicly executed\nan innocent father, or with having acquitted a guilty mother,\nbrother, and friend.\n\nJohn Calas, a person of sixty-eight years of age, had followed the\nprofession of a merchant in Toulouse for upwards of forty years,\nand had always borne the character of a tender parent in his family\nand neighborhood; he was himself by religion a Protestant, as was\nalso his wife, and all his children, one son only excepted, who had\nabjured heresy, and to whom the father allowed a small annuity;\nindeed, the good man appeared so far from being infected with that\nabsurd zeal which destroys the bands of society, that he even\napproved of the conversion of his son, Louis Calas. He had for above\nthirty years kept in his house a maid-servant, who was a zealous\nCatholic, and who had brought up all his children.\n\nAnother of his sons, whose name was Mark Antony, was a man of\nletters, but, at the same time, of a restless, gloomy, and impetuous\ndisposition. This young man finding that he had no prospect of\ngetting into business as a merchant, for which indeed he was very\nunfit, nor of being admitted to the bar as a lawyer, as not being\nable to obtain the requisite certificates of his being a Catholic,\nresolved to lay violent hands upon himself, and gave some intimation\nof his design to one of his friends. In order to confirm himself in\nthe resolution he had formed, he carefully collected everything that\nhad been written upon the subject of suicide, all of which he read\nwith great attention; at length, one day, having lost all his money\nat play, he chose that as a most proper opportunity for putting his\ndesign into execution. One Lavaisse, a young man of nineteen years\nof age, the son of a lawyer in great repute at Toulouse, and who was\nesteemed by every one who knew him, happened to come from Bordeaux\nthe evening before,[2] when he went by chance to sup with the Calas\nfamily at their house, being an acquaintance of that family\u2019s, and of\nMark Antony Calas in particular. Old Calas, his wife, Mark Antony,\ntheir eldest son, and Peter their second son, supped all together\nthat evening; after supper was over, they retired into another room,\nwhere Mark Antony suddenly disappeared. After some time, young\nLavaisse took his leave, and Peter Calas accompanied him downstairs;\nwhen they came to the warehouse they saw Mark Antony hanging in his\nshirt behind the door, and his coat and waistcoat folded up and laid\nupon the counter; his shirt was not in the least rumpled, nor his\nhair, which he had dressed that day, in any wise disordered; there\nwas no wound upon his body, nor any other mark of violence.[3]\n\nWe shall not here enter into all the minute circumstances with\nwhich the lawyers have filled their briefs; nor shall we attempt to\ndescribe the grief and distraction of the unhappy parents; their\ncries were heard by the whole neighborhood. Lavaisse and Peter Calas,\nalmost beside themselves, ran, the one to fetch a surgeon, and the\nother an officer of justice. While they were thus employed, and\nold Calas and his wife in all the agonies of grief, the people of\nthe town gathered in crowds about the house. The Toulousians are a\nsuperstitious and headstrong people, and look upon all persons, even\ntheir own relations, who are not of the same religion as themselves,\nas monsters and objects of detestation. It was at Toulouse that a\nsolemn thanksgiving was ordered for the death of Henry III. and that\nthe inhabitants took an oath to murder the first person who should\npropose to acknowledge that great and good prince Henry IV. for their\nsovereign; and this same city still continues to solemnize, by an\nannual procession, illuminations, and bonfires, the day on which,\nabout two hundred years ago, it ordered the massacre of four thousand\nof its citizens for being heretics. In vain has the council issued\nsix decrees prohibiting the keeping of this detestable anniversary,\nthe Toulousians still continuing to celebrate it as a high festival.\n\nSome one among the mob, a greater enthusiast than the rest, cried out\nthat John Calas himself had hanged his son; this cry became in an\ninstant unanimous, some persons taking occasion to observe that the\ndeceased was to have made his abjuration the next day, and that his\nown family and young Lavaisse had murdered him out of the hatred they\nbore to the Catholic religion. No sooner was this opinion broached,\nthan it was fully believed by every one; and the whole town was\npersuaded that it is one of the articles of the Protestant religion\nfor a father or mother to murder their own son, if he attempts to\nshow any inclination to change his faith.\n\nWhen the minds of the populace are once put into a ferment they are\nnot easily appeased; it was now imagined that all the Protestants of\nLanguedoc had assembled together the preceding night, and had chosen\nby a plurality of voices one of their sect for an executioner; that\nthe choice had fallen upon Lavaisse; that this young man had, in less\nthan four and twenty hours, received the news of his election, and\nhad come from Bordeaux to assist John Calas, his wife, and their son\nPeter, to murder a son, a brother, and a friend.\n\nThe Sieur David, capitoul of Toulouse, instigated by these rumors,\nand being desirous of bringing himself into notice, by the ready\nexecution of his office, took a step contrary to all the established\nrules and ordinances, by ordering the Calas family, together with\ntheir Catholic maid-servant and Lavaisse, to be put in irons.\n\nAfter this a monitory was published, which was as erroneous as the\nformer step. Nay, matters were carried still farther; Mark Antony\nCalas had certainly died a Calvinist, and as such, if he had laid\nviolent hands on himself, his body ought to have been dragged on a\nhurdle; whereas it was interred with the greatest funeral pomp in the\nchurch of St. Stephen, notwithstanding the curate entered his protest\nagainst this profanation of holy ground.\n\nThere are in Languedoc four orders of penitents, the white, the blue,\nthe gray, and the black, who wear a long capuchin or hood, having a\nmask of cloth falling down over the face, in which are two holes for\nthe sight. These orders wanted the Duke of Fitz-James to become one\nof their body, but he refused them. On the present occasion the white\npenitents performed a solemn service for Mark Antony Calas as for a\nmartyr; nor was the festival of a real martyr ever celebrated with\ngreater pomp by any church: but then this pomp was truly terrible.\nBeneath a magnificent canopy was placed a skeleton, which was made to\nmove by springs; this skeleton was to represent Mark Antony Calas,\nholding in one hand a branch of palm, and, in the other, the pen\nwith which he was to sign his abjuration of heresy; or rather, as the\nsequel proved, the death-warrant of his father.\n\nAnd now nothing more remained to be done for this wretch who had been\nhis own murderer but the office of canonization; the people, already\nto a man, looked on him as a saint; some invoked him, some went to\npray at his tomb, some besought him to work miracles, while others\ngravely recounted those he had already performed; a monk pulled out\none or two of his teeth, in order to have some lasting relics; an\nold woman, more pious than the rest, but unhappily troubled with a\ndeafness, declared that she had heard the sound of bells very plainly\nat his interment; and a priest was cured of an apoplectic fit, after\ntaking a stout emetic; protocols were drawn up of these stupendous\nmiracles, and the author of this account has in his possession an\naffidavit to prove that a young man of Toulouse had his brain turned,\non having prayed several nights successively at the tomb of the new\nsaint, without having been able to obtain the miracle he requested of\nhim.\n\nAmong the order of the white penitents there were some magistrates of\njustice; the death of John Calas seemed then inevitable.\n\nBut what more particularly hastened his fate was the approach of\nthat singular festival, which, as I have already observed, the\nToulousians celebrate every year, in commemoration of the massacre\nof four thousand Huguenots; the year 1762 happened to be the _annum\nseculare_ of this execrable deed. The inhabitants were busied in\nmaking preparations for the solemnity; this circumstance added fresh\nfuel to the heated imagination of the populace; every one cried out\nthat a scaffold for the execution of the Calas family would be one of\nthe greatest ornaments of the ceremony; and that heaven itself seemed\nto have brought them thither as victims, to be sacrificed to our holy\nreligion. Twenty persons were ear-witnesses to these speeches, and to\nothers still more outrageous. And this, in the present age! this at\na time when philosophy has made so great a progress! and while the\npens of a hundred academies are employed in inculcating humanity and\ngentleness of manners. It should seem that enthusiasm enraged at the\nlate success of reason, fought under her standard with redoubled fury.\n\nThirteen judges met every day to try this cause; they had not, they\ncould not, have any proof against this unhappy family; but mistaken\nzeal held the place of proofs. Six of the judges continued a long\ntime obstinate, being resolved to sentence John Calas, his son, and\nLavaisse, to be broken on the wheel, and his wife to be burned at\nthe stake; the other seven judges, rather more moderate, were at\nleast for having the accused examined; the debates were frequent\nand long. One of the judges, convinced in his mind of the innocence\nof the parties, and of the impossibility of the crime laid to their\ncharge, spoke warmly in their favor; he opposed the zeal of humanity\nto that of cruelty, and openly pleaded the cause of the Calas family\nin all the houses of Toulouse where misguided religion demanded with\nincessant cries the blood of these unfortunate wretches. Another\njudge, well known for his violence and severity, went about the town,\nraving with as much fury against the accused as his brother had been\nearnest in defending them. In short, the contest became so warm that\nboth were obliged to enter protests against each other\u2019s proceedings,\nand retire into the country.\n\nBut by a strange fatality, the judge who had been on the favorable\nside had the delicacy to persist in his exceptions, and the other\nreturned to give his vote against those on whom he could no longer\nsit as judge; and it was his single vote which carried the sentence\nof being broken upon the wheel against them, there being eight voices\nagainst five, one of the six merciful judges being at last, after\nmuch contestation, brought over to the rigorous side.\n\nIn my opinion, in cases of parricide, and where the master of a\nfamily is to be devoted to the most dreadful punishment, the sentence\nought to be unanimous, inasmuch as the proofs of so unparalleled[4]\na crime ought to be proved in such a manner as to satisfy all the\nworld, and the least shadow of a doubt in a case of this nature\nshould be sufficient to make the judge tremble who is about to pass\nsentence of death. The weakness of our reason, and the insufficiency\nof our laws, become every day more obvious; but surely there cannot\nbe a greater example of this deficiency than that one single casting\nvote should be sufficient to condemn a fellow-citizen to be broken\nalive on the wheel; the Athenians required at least fifty voices,\nover and above the one-half of the judges, before they would dare to\npronounce sentence of death; but to what does all this tend? Why, to\nwhat we know, but make very little use of, that the Greeks were wiser\nand more humane than ourselves.\n\nIt appeared altogether impossible that John Calas, who was an old man\nof sixty-eight, and had a long while been troubled with a swelling\nand weakness in his legs, should have been able by himself to have\nmastered his son and hanged him, who was a stout young fellow of\neight and twenty, and more than commonly robust; therefore he must\nabsolutely have been assisted in this act by his wife, his other\nson, Peter Calas, Lavaisse, and by the servant-maid, and they had\nbeen together the whole night of this fatal adventure. But this\nsupposition is altogether as absurd as the other; for can any one\nbelieve that a servant, who was a zealous Catholic, would have\npermitted those whom she looked on as heretics to murder a young man\nwhom she herself had brought up, for his attachment to a religion\nto which she herself was devoted; that Lavaisse would have come\npurposely from Bordeaux to assist in hanging his friend, of whose\npretended conversion he knew nothing, or that an affectionate mother\nwould have joined in laying violent hands on her own son? And lastly,\nhow could they all together have been able to strangle a young man\nstronger than them all, without a long and violent struggle, or\nwithout his making such a noise as must have been heard by the whole\nneighborhood, without repeated blows passing between them, without\nany marks of violence, or without any of their clothes being in the\nleast soiled or disordered!\n\nIt was evident that if this murder could in the nature of things have\nbeen committed, the accused persons were all of them equally guilty,\nbecause they did not quit each other\u2019s company an instant the whole\nnight; but then it was equally evident that they were not guilty, and\nthat the father alone could not be so, and yet, by the sentence of\nthe judges, the father alone was condemned to suffer.\n\nThe motive on which this sentence was passed was as unaccountable\nas all the rest of the proceeding. Those judges who had given their\nopinion for the execution of John Calas persuaded the others that\nthis poor old man, unable to support the torments, would, when on\nthe wheel, make a full confession of his own guilt and that of his\naccomplices; but how wretchedly were they confounded, when yielding\nup his breath on that instrument of execution, he called God as a\nwitness of his innocence, and besought Him to forgive his judges!\n\nThey were afterwards obliged to pass a second decree, which\ncontradicted the first, namely to set at liberty the mother, her\nson Peter, young Lavaisse, and the maid-servant; but one of the\ncounsellors having made them sensible that this latter decree\ncontradicted the other, and that they condemned themselves, inasmuch\nas, it having been proved that all the accused parties had been\nconstantly together during the whole time the murder was supposed\nto be committed, the setting at liberty the survivors was an\nincontestable proof of the innocence of the master of the family whom\nthey had ordered to be executed; on this it was determined to banish\nPeter Calas, the son, which was an act as ill-grounded and absurd as\nany of the rest, for Peter Calas was either guilty or not guilty of\nthe murder; if he was guilty, he ought to have suffered in the same\nmanner as his father; if he was innocent, there was no reason for\nbanishing him. But the judges, frightened with the sufferings of the\nfather, and with that affecting piety with which he had resigned his\nlife, thought to preserve their characters by making people believe\nthat they showed mercy to the son; as if this was not a new degree\nof prevarication, and that, thinking no bad consequences could arise\nfrom banishing this young man, who was poor and destitute of friends,\nwas not a very great additional act of injustice after that which\nthey had been already so unfortunate as to commit.\n\nThey now began to go to work with Peter Calas in his confinement,\nthreatening to treat him as they had done his father, if he would\nnot abjure his religion. This the young man has declared on oath, as\nfollows:\n\n \u201cA Dominican friar came to me to my cell, and threatened me with the\n same kind of death if I did not abjure; this I attest before God,\n this 23d day of July, 1762.                          PETER CALAS.\u201d\n\nAs Peter was going out of the town, he was met by one of the abb\u00e9s\nwith a converting spirit, who made him return back to Toulouse, where\nhe was shut up in a convent of Dominicans, and there compelled to\nperform all the functions of a convert to the Catholic religion;\nthis was in part what his persecutors aimed at, it was the price of\nhis father\u2019s blood, and due atonement now seemed to be made to the\nreligion of which they looked on themselves as the avengers.\n\nThe daughters were next taken from their mother, and shut up in a\nconvent. This unhappy woman, who had been, as it were, sprinkled with\nthe blood of her husband, who had held her eldest son lifeless within\nher arms, had seen the other banished, her daughters taken from her,\nherself stripped of her effects, and left alone in the wide world\ndestitute of bread, and bereft of hopes, was almost weighed down to\nthe grave with the excess of her misfortunes. Some certain persons,\nwho had maturely weighed all the circumstances of this horrible\nadventure, were so struck with them that they pressed Mrs. Calas, who\nnow led a life of retirement and solitude, to exert herself, and go\nand demand justice at the foot of the throne. At this time she was\nscarcely able to drag about the remains of a miserable life; besides,\nhaving been born in England and brought over to a distant province in\nFrance when very young, the very name of the city of Paris frightened\nher. She imagined that in the capital of the kingdom they must be\nstill more cruel than in Toulouse; at length, however, the duty of\nrevenging the death of her husband got the better of her weakness.\nShe set out for Paris, arrived there half dead, and was surprised\nto find herself received with tenderness, sympathy, and offers of\nassistance.\n\nIn Paris reason always triumphs over enthusiasm, however great,\nwhereas in the more distant provinces of the kingdom, enthusiasm\nalmost always triumphs over reason.\n\nM. de Beaumont, a famous lawyer of the Parliament of Paris,\nimmediately took her cause in hand, and drew up an opinion, which\nwas signed by fifteen other lawyers. M. Loiseau, equally famous for\nhis eloquence, likewise drew up a memorial in favor of this unhappy\nfamily; and M. Mariette, solicitor to the council, drew up a formal\nstatement of the case, which struck every one who read it with\nconviction.\n\nThese three noble defenders of the laws and of innocence made the\nwidow a present of all the profits arising from the publication of\nthese pieces,[5] which filled not only Paris but all Europe with pity\nfor this unfortunate woman, and every one cried aloud for justice to\nbe done her. In a word, the public passed sentence on this affair\nlong before it was determined by the council.\n\nThe soft infection made its way even to the Cabinet, notwithstanding\nthe continual round of business, which often excludes pity, and the\nfamiliarity of beholding miserable objects, which too frequently\nsteels the heart of the statesman against the cries of distress. The\ndaughters were restored to their disconsolate mother, and all three\nin deep mourning, and bathed in tears, drew a sympathetic flood from\nthe eyes of their judges, before whom they prostrated themselves in\nthankful acknowledgment.\n\nNevertheless, this family had still some enemies to encounter, for\nit is to be considered that this was an affair of religion. Several\npersons, whom in France we call _d\u00e9vots_,[6] declared publicly that\nit was much better to suffer an old Calvinist, though innocent, to\nbe broken alive upon the wheel, than to expose eight counsellors of\nLanguedoc to the mortification of being obliged to own that they had\nbeen mistaken; nay, these people made use of this very expression:\n\u201cThat there were more magistrates than Calases\u201d; by which it would\nseem they inferred that the Calas family ought to be sacrificed\nto the honor of the magistracy. Alas! they never reflected that\nthe honor of a judge, like that of another man, consists in making\nreparation for the faults he may have committed.\n\nIn France no one believes that the pope, even when assisted by his\ncardinals, is infallible; ought they then to have believed that eight\njudges of Toulouse were so? Every sensible and disinterested person\ndid without scruple declare that the decree of the court of justice\nof Toulouse would be looked upon as void by all Europe, even though\nparticular considerations might prevent it from being declared so by\nthe council.\n\nSuch was the state of this surprising affair when it occasioned\ncertain impartial, but sensible, persons to form the design of laying\nbefore the public a few reflections upon toleration, indulgence,\nand commiseration, which the Abb\u00e9 Houteville in his bombastic and\ndeclamatory work, which is false in all the facts, calls a _monstrous\ndoctrine_, but which reason calls the portion of human nature.\n\nEither the judges of Toulouse, carried away by popular enthusiasm,\ncaused the innocent master of a family to be put to a painful\nand ignominious death, a thing which is without example; or this\nmaster of a family and his wife murdered their eldest son, with the\nassistance of another son and a friend, which is altogether contrary\nto nature. In either case, the most holy of all religions has been\nperverted to the production of an enormous crime. It is therefore\nto the interest of mankind to examine how far charity or cruelty is\nconsistent with true religion.\n\n\n CHAPTER II.\n CONSEQUENCES OF THE EXECUTION OF JOHN CALAS.\n\nIf the order of white penitents had been the cause of the punishment\nof an innocent person, and of the utter ruin and dispersion of a\nwhole family, and of branding them with that ignominy which is\nannexed to those who suffer, when it ought properly to fall only\nupon those who pass an unjust sentence; if the frantic hurry of\nthese penitents in celebrating as a saint one whom they ought to\nhave treated as a self-murderer, brought a virtuous, an innocent\nfellow-citizen to the scaffold, surely this fatal mistake ought to\nmake them true penitents for the rest of their lives, and they and\nthe judges ought to have their eyes continually filled with tears,\nwithout wearing a white cloak or a mask on their faces, to hide\nthose tears. We have a proper respect for all religious orders\u2014they\nare edifying; but will all the good they have ever been able to do\nthe state compensate for the shocking disaster of which they have\nbeen the cause? Their institution seems to have been the work of\nthat zeal which animates the Catholics of Languedoc against those we\ncall Huguenots. One would be tempted to imagine that they had made\na vow to hate their brethren; and that, though men have religion\nenough to hate and persecute, they have not sufficient to love and\ncherish one another. But what would be the case if these orders were\ngoverned by enthusiastic superiors, as were certain congregations,\namong whom, to use the words of one of our most eloquent and learned\nmagistrates, the custom of seeing visions was reduced to an art and\nsystem? Or that their convents had in them those dark rooms, called\nmeditation rooms, which were filled with pictures of frightful\ndevils, armed with long horns and talons, flaming gulfs, crosses, and\ndaggers, with the holy name of Jesus in a scroll over them? Edifying\nspectacles, doubtless, for eyes already blinded with fanaticism, and\nfor imaginations no less filled with mistaken zeal than with abject\nsubmission to the will of their directors!\n\nThere have been times, and we know it but too well, in which\nreligious orders have been dangerous to the state. The Fr\u00e9rots and\nthe Flagellants have excited troubles in the kingdom. The League owed\nits origin to such associations. But wherefore should any set of men\nthus distinguish themselves from the rest of their fellow-citizens?\nIs it that they think themselves more perfect? If so, it is offering\nan insult to the rest of the community; or are they desirous that\nevery Christian should become a member of their society? Truly, it\nwould be a curious sight to see all the inhabitants of Europe in long\nhoods and masks, with two little round holes to peep through! Or,\nlastly, do they seriously think that this dress is more acceptable to\nGod than the coats and waistcoats we usually wear? No, no, there is\nsomething more at the bottom; this habit is a kind of controversial\nuniform, a signal for those of a contrary opinion to stand upon their\nguard, and might in time kindle a kind of civil war in our minds\nthat would terminate in the most terrible consequences, were not the\nwisdom of the king and of his ministers as great as the folly of\nthese fanatics.\n\nEvery one is sufficiently sensible what fatal effects have arisen\nsince Christians have begun to dispute among themselves concerning\nmodes of belief; the blood of the subjects has flown in torrents\neither on the scaffold or in the field, from the fourth century to\nthe present time. But let us confine ourselves only to the wars and\ndisasters which the disputes concerning reformation have excited in\nFrance, and examine into their source. Perhaps a short and faithful\nportrait of these numberless calamities may open the eyes of some who\nhave not had the advantage of education, and touch those hearts which\nare not by nature callous.\n\n\n CHAPTER III.\n A SKETCH OF THE REFORMATION IN THE SIXTEENTH CENTURY.\n\nWhen learning began to revive, and the understandings of mankind\nbecame more enlightened, there was a general complaint of errors and\nabuses, and every one acknowledged the complaint to be just.\n\nPope Alexander VI. made a public purchase of the pontifical crown,\nand his five bastards shared with him the profits. His son, the\nCardinal Duke of Borgia, in concert with the pope, his father, caused\nthe noble families of Vitelli, Urbino, Gravina, and Oliveretto,\ntogether with a hundred other lords, to be made away with, in order\nto seize upon their estates. Julius II., full of the same spirit,\nexcommunicated Louis XII. of France, while he himself, armed\ncap-a-pie, ravaged a part of Italy with fire and sword. Leo X., in\norder to raise money to pay the expenses of his pleasures, made a\nsale of indulgences, like goods in a common market. Those who opposed\nsuch shameful impositions were certainly right in a moral view; let\nus see how far they were so with regard to us, in a political one.\n\nThey asserted that as Jesus Christ had never exacted annats, nor\nreversions, nor sold dispensations for this world nor indulgences for\nthe next, they saw no reason why they should pay a foreign prince\nhis price for these things. Supposing that the annats, the law\nproceedings in the pope\u2019s court, and the dispensations which still\nsubsist were to cost us no more than five hundred thousand crowns a\nyear; it is clear that since the time of Francis I., that is, in two\nhundred and fifty years, we have paid a hundred and twenty millions;\nand if we calculate the different value of the mark of silver, we\nshall find that this sum amounts to about two hundred and fifty\nmillions of the present money. It may therefore, I think, without any\nblasphemy be allowed that the heretics in proposing the abolition of\nthese extraordinary taxes, which will be the admiration of posterity,\ndid, in that respect, no great injury to the kingdom, and showed\nthemselves good calculators rather than bad subjects. Add to this,\nthat they were the only persons who understood the Greek language,\nor had any knowledge of antiquity; let us own likewise, without\ndissimulation, that with all their errors, we are indebted to them\nfor the opening of our understandings, which had been long buried\nbeneath the most barbarous obscurity.\n\nBut as they denied the doctrine of purgatory, concerning which no\none ought to have the least doubt, and which, moreover, brought in\na comfortable revenue to the monks; as they paid no reverence to\nrelics which every one ought to reverence, and which brought in still\ngreater profits; and lastly, as they attacked the most respectable\ntenets,[7] their adversaries made them no other reply than by\ncommitting them to the stake. The king, who styled himself their\nprotector, and who kept a body of them in pay in Germany, marched at\nthe head of a procession through Paris, which was concluded by the\nexecution of a number of these unhappy wretches, in the following\nmanner:\n\nThey were suspended at the end of a long beam, which played upon\na pole erected for that purpose, and underneath them was kindled a\nlarge fire, into which they were alternately lowered and then raised\nup again, by which they experienced the most excruciating torments,\ntill a lingering death at last put an end to the longest and most\ndreadful punishment that cruelty ever invented.\n\nA short time before the death of Francis I., the members of the\nParliament of Provence, whom the clergy had incensed against the\ninhabitants of Mirandol and Cabri\u00e8re, applied to the king for a body\nof troops to attend the execution of nineteen persons of that country\nwho had been condemned by them; with the assistance of this armed\nforce they massacred about six thousand souls, without sparing sex\nor age, and reduced thirty villages to ashes. The people who were\nthe objects of these executions, and who had, till then, been in a\nmanner unknown, were doubtless to blame for having been born Vaudois,\nbut this was their only crime. They had been settled for upwards\nof three hundred years in deserts and on mountains, which they had\nrendered fertile by incredible labor, and led a pastoral and quiet\nlife, the perfect image of the innocence which we find attributed to\nthe first ages of the world. They had no acquaintance with the towns\nor villages round about them, except that obtained by carrying the\nproduce of their grounds thither to sell. Totally ignorant of all\nmilitary operations, they made no defence, but were slaughtered like\ntimorous animals, whom we drive into a net and then knock them on the\nhead.[8]\n\nAfter the death of Francis I., a prince who, it must be confessed,\nwas more remarkable for his gallantries and his misfortunes than for\nhis cruelty, the execution of a thousand heretics, and in particular\nthat of Dubourg, a counsellor of the parliament, together with the\nmassacre of Vassy, made the persecuted fly to arms. Their sect\nmultiplied in proportion with the fires lighted for them, and the\nswords of executioners drawn against them, patience gave way to rage,\nand they followed the example of their enemies in cruelty. Nine civil\nwars filled France with carnage, and a peace, more fatal than war\nitself, produced the day of St. Bartholomew, which stands without\nexample in the annals of crime.\n\nHenry III. and Henry IV. fell victims to the league, the one by the\nhand of a Dominican friar, and the other by that of a monster who had\nbeen a brother of the mendicant order. There are those who pretend\nthat humanity, indulgence, and liberty of conscience are horrible\nthings; I would ask such persons seriously, if they could have\nproduced calamities comparable to those I have just related?\n\n\n CHAPTER IV.\n WHETHER TOLERATION IS DANGEROUS, AND\n AMONG WHAT NATIONS IT IS PRACTISED.\n\nSome people will have it, that if we were to make use of humanity\nand indulgence towards our mistaken brethren who pray to God in bad\nFrench, it would be putting arms into their hands, and we should see\nrevived the bloody days of Jarnac, Moncontour, Coutras, Dreux, St.\nDenis, and others. I know not how this may be, as I have not the\ngift of prophecy, but I really cannot discover the congruity of this\nreasoning, \u201cthat because these men took up arms against me when I\noppressed them, they will do the same if I show them favor.\u201d\n\nAnd here I would willingly take the liberty to entreat those who have\nthe reins of government in hand, or are destined to fill the highest\nstations, for once to examine maturely whether there is any reason\nto apprehend that indulgence would occasion the same rebellions as\ncruelty and oppression, and whether what has happened under certain\ncircumstances would happen under others of a different nature, or\nwhether times, opinions, and manners are always the same?\n\nThe Huguenots, it cannot be denied, have formerly given in to all\nthe rage of enthusiasm, and have been polluted with blood as well\nas ourselves, but can it be said that the present generation is as\nbarbarous as the former? Have not time and reason, which have lately\nmade so great progress, together with good books, and that natural\nsoftness introduced from society, found their way among those who\nhave the guidance of these people? And do we not clearly perceive\nthat almost all Europe has undergone a change within the last century?\n\nThe hands of government have everywhere been strengthened, while the\nminds of the people have been softened and civilized; the general\npolice, supported by numerous standing armies, leave us no longer any\ncause to fear the return of those times of anarchy, when Protestant\nboors and Catholic peasants were hastily called together from the\nlabors of agriculture to wield the sword against each others\u2019 lives.\n\n_Alia tempora, ali\u00e6 cur\u00e6._ It would be highly absurd in the present\ndays to decimate the body of the Sorbonne because it formerly\npetitioned for burning the _Pucelle d\u2019Orl\u00e9ans_ because it declared\nHenry III. to have lost his right to the throne, and because it\nexcommunicated and proscribed the illustrious Henry IV. We certainly\nshould not think of prosecuting the other public bodies of the\nnation, who committed the like excesses in those times of error and\nmadness; it would not only be very unjust, but as ridiculous as if we\nwere to oblige all the inhabitants of Marseilles to undergo a course\nof physic because they had the plague in 1720.\n\n[Illustration: THE MAID OF ORLEANS AT THE STAKE]\n\nShould we at present go and sack Rome, as the troops of Charles\nthe Fifth did, because Pope Sixtus the Fifth, in the year 1585,\ngranted a nine years\u2019 indulgence to all Frenchmen who would take up\narms against their sovereign? No, surely it is enough if we prevent\nthe court of Rome from ever being guilty of such excesses in the\nfuture.\n\nThe rage inspired by a spirit of controversy, and the abuse made\nof the Christian religion from want of properly understanding it,\nhas occasioned as much bloodshed, and produced as many calamities\nin Germany, England, and even in Holland, as in France; and yet,\nat present, the difference in religion occasions no disturbances\nin those countries; but the Jew, the Catholic, the Lutheran, the\nCalvinist, the Anabaptist, the Socinian, the Moravian, and a\nmultitude of other sects live in brotherly harmony together, and\ncontribute equally to the good of society.\n\nIn Holland they no longer fear that the disputations of a Gomar[9]\nconcerning predestination should bring the head of a grand\npensionary to the block, nor in London that the quarrels between\nthe Presbyterians and the Episcopals about a form of prayer and\na surplice should again spill the blood of their kings upon a\nscaffold.[10] Ireland, now populous and rich, will not any more\nbehold its Catholic inhabitants sacrificing, as an acceptable\noffering, the lives of their Protestant brethren, by burying them\nalive, hanging up mothers upon gibbets, and tying their daughters\nround their necks to see them expire together; ripping up women with\nchild, taking the half-formed infant from the womb, and throwing it\nto swine or dogs to be devoured; putting a dagger into the hands of\ntheir manacled prisoners, and forcing them to plunge it into the\nbreasts of their fathers, their mothers, their wives, or children,\nthereby hoping to make them guilty of parricide, and damn their souls\nwhile they destroyed their bodies; all which we find related by\nRapin, who served as an officer in the English service in Ireland,\nand who lived very near the time of those transactions, and confirmed\nby most of the English historians. No! such cruelties as these were\nnever to be paralleled, so they doubtless will never be imitated.\nPhilosophy, the sister of religion, has herself snatched the poniard\nfrom the hands of superstition, so long bathed in blood; and the\nhuman understanding, recovered from its delirium, stands amazed at\nthe shocking brutalities into which it has been hurried by enthusiasm.\n\nWe ourselves know that in France there is a rich and populous\nprovince where the Protestant religion prevails much more than that\nof the Church of Rome. The University of Alsace consists almost\nentirely of Lutherans, and they are likewise in possession of most\nof the civil posts in that province; and yet the public peace has\nnever once been disturbed by any quarrels about religion since that\nprovince has belonged to our kings. And what is the reason? Because\nno one is persecuted there on account of his religion. Seek not to\nlay a restraint upon the mind, and you may always be sure that the\nmind will be yours.\n\nI do not mean by this to insinuate that those who are of a different\nfaith to the prince under whose government they live should have\nan equal share in the places of profits and honor with those who\nare of the established religion of the state. In England the\nRoman Catholics, who are in general looked upon to be friends to\nthe Pretender, are excluded from all civil posts, and are even\ndouble-taxed; but then, in every other respect, they enjoy the\nprerogatives of citizens.\n\nSome of our bishops in France have been suspected of thinking\nthat their honor and interest is concerned in not suffering any\nProtestants within their diocese, and that this is the principal\nobstacle to allowing of toleration amongst us; but this I cannot\nbelieve. The episcopal body in France is composed of persons of\nquality, who think and act in a manner suitable to their high\nbirth; and as envy itself must confess that they are generous and\ncharitable, they therefore certainly cannot think that those whom\nthey thus drive out of their diocese would become converts in any\nother country, but great honor would redound from the conversion\nof them at home; nor would the prelate be any loser by it in his\ntemporals, seeing that the greater the number of the inhabitants, the\ngreater is the value of the land.\n\nA certain Polish bishop had a farmer who was an Anabaptist, and a\nreceiver of his rents who was a Socinian. Some person proposed to\nthe bishop to prosecute the latter in the spiritual court for not\nbelieving in transubstantiation, and to turn the other out of his\nfarm because he would not have his son christened till he was fifteen\nyears of age; the prelate very prudently replied that though he made\nno doubt of their being eternally damned in the next world, yet he\nfound them extremely necessary to him in this.\n\nLet us now for a while quit our own little sphere, and take a survey\nof the rest of the globe. The Grand Seignior peaceably rules over\nsubjects of twenty different religions; upwards of two hundred\nthousand Greeks live unmolested within the walls of Constantinople;\nthe mufti himself nominates the Greek patriarch, and presents him\nto the Emperor, and, at the same time, allows the residence of a\nLatin patriarch. The Sultan appoints Latin bishops for some of the\nGreek isles. The form used on this occasion is as follows:[11] \u201cI\ncommand such a one to go and reside as bishop in the Isle of Chios,\naccording to the ancient custom and idle ceremonies of those people.\u201d\nThe Ottoman Empire swarms with Jacobins, Nestorians, Monothelites,\nCophti, Christians of St. John, Guebres, and Banians; and the Turkish\nannals do not furnish us with one single instance of a rebellion\noccasioned by any of these different sects.\n\nGo into India, Persia, and Tartary, and you will meet with the same\ntoleration and the same tranquillity. Peter the Great encouraged all\nkinds of religions throughout his vast empire; trade and agriculture\nhave been gainers by it, and no injury ever happened therefrom to the\nbody politic.\n\nWe do not find that the Chinese government, during the course of\nfour thousand years that it has existed, has ever adopted any other\nreligion than that of the Noachides, which consists in the simple\nworship of one God; and yet it tolerates the superstitions of Fo, and\nthat of a multitude of bonzes; which might be productive of dangerous\nconsequences did not the wisdom of the tribunals keep them within\nproper bounds.\n\nIt is true that the great Yong-T-Chin, the most wise and magnanimous\nof all the emperors of China, drove the Jesuits out of his kingdom;\nbut this was not because that prince himself was non-tolerant, but,\non the contrary, because the Jesuits were so.\n\nThey themselves, in their letters, have given us the speech the\nemperor made to them on that occasion: \u201cI know,\u201d said he, \u201cthat\nyour religion admits not of toleration; I know how you have behaved\nin the Manilas and in Japan; you deceived my father, but think\nnot to deceive me in the same manner.\u201d And if we read the whole\nof the conversation which he deigned to hold with them, we must\nconfess him to be the wisest and most clement of all princes. How\ncould he indeed, with any consistency, keep in his kingdom European\nphilosophers, who, under the pretence of teaching the use of\nthermometers and eolipiles, had found means to debauch a prince of\nthe blood? But what would this emperor have said had he read our\nhistories, and had he been acquainted with the times of the League\nand the Gunpowder Plot?\n\nIt was sufficient for him to be informed of the outrageous and\nindecent disputes between those Jesuits, Dominicans, Capuchins, and\nsecular priests who were sent as missionaries into his dominions from\none extremity of the globe to preach the truth; instead of which\nthey employed their time in mutually pronouncing damnation against\none another. The emperor, then, did no more than send away a set of\nforeigners who were disturbers of the public peace. But with what\ninfinite goodness did he dismiss them! and with what paternal care\ndid he provide for their accommodation in their journey, and to\nprevent their meeting with any insult on their way! This very act\nof banishment might serve as an example of toleration and humanity.\n[12] The Japanese were the most tolerant of all nations; twelve\ndifferent religions were peaceably established in their empire; when\nthe Jesuits came, they made the thirteenth; and, in a very little\ntime after their arrival, they would not suffer any other than their\nown. Everyone knows the consequence of these proceedings; a civil\nwar, as calamitous as that of the League, soon spread destruction and\ncarnage through the empire; till at length the Christian religion was\nitself swallowed up in the torrents of blood it had set aflowing, and\nthe Japanese forever shut the entrance of their country against all\nforeigners, looking upon us as no better than savage beasts, such\nas those from which the English have happily cleared their island.\nColbert, the minister, who knew the necessity we were in of the\ncommodities of Japan, which wants nothing from us, labored in vain to\nsettle a trade with that empire; he found those people inflexible.\n\nThus, then, everything on our continent shows us that we ought\nneither to preach nor to exercise non-toleration.\n\nLet us now cast our eyes on the other hemisphere. Behold Carolina!\nwhose laws were framed by the wise Locke; there every master of a\nfamily, who has only seven souls under his roof, may establish what\nreligion he pleases, provided all those seven persons concur with him\ntherein; and yet this great indulgence has not, hitherto, been the\noccasion of any disorders. God forbid that I should mention this as\nan example to every master of a family to set up a particular worship\nin his house; I have only introduced it to show that the utmost\nlengths to which toleration can be carried have never yet given rise\neven to the slightest dissensions.\n\nAnd what shall we say of those pacific primitive Christians, who\nhave, by way of derision, been called Quakers; and who, though some\nof their customs may perhaps be ridiculous, are yet remarkable for\nthe virtue and sobriety of their lives, and for having in vain\nendeavored to preach peace and good-will to the rest of mankind?\nThere are at least a hundred thousand of them in Pennsylvania;\ndiscord and controversy are unknown in that happy spot where they\nhave settled; the very name of their principal city, Philadelphia, is\na continual memento to them that all men are brethren, and is at once\nan example and reproach to those nations which have not yet adopted\ntoleration.\n\nTo conclude, toleration has never yet excited civil wars, whereas its\nopposite has filled the earth with slaughter and desolation. Let any\none then judge which of the two is more entitled to our esteem, or\nwhich we should applaud; the mother who would deliver her son into\nthe hand of the executioner, or she who would resign all right to him\nto save his life.\n\nIn all that I have said I have had only the interest of nations in\nview, and, as I pay all due respect to the doctrines of the Church,\nI have in this article only considered the physical and moral\nadvantages of society. I therefore hope that every impartial reader\nwill properly weigh these truths, that he will view them in their\nproper light, and rectify what may be amiss. Those who read with\nattention, and reciprocally communicate their thoughts, will always\nhave the start of the author.[13]\n\n\n CHAPTER V.\n IN WHAT CASES TOLERATION MAY BE ADMITTED.\n\nLet me for once suppose that a minister equally noble and discerning,\nthat a prelate equally wise and humane, or a prince who is sensible\nthat his interest consists in the increased number of his subjects,\nand his glory in their happiness, may deign to cast their eyes on\nthis random and defective production. In this case his own consummate\nknowledge will naturally lead him to ask himself, \u201cWhat hazard shall\nI run by seeing the land beautiful and enriched by a greater number\nof industrious laborers, the aids augmented, and the state rendered\nmore flourishing?\u201d\n\nGermany, by this time, would have been a desert, covered with the\nunburied bodies of many different sects, slaughtered by one another,\nhad not the Peace of Westphalia happily procured a liberty of\nconscience.\n\nWe have Jews in Bordeaux, in Mentz, and in Alsace; we have Lutherans,\nMolinists, and Jansenists amongst us; can we not then admit\nProtestants likewise under proper restrictions, nearly like those\nunder which the Roman Catholics are permitted in England? The greater\nthe number of different sects, the less danger is to be apprehended\nfrom any one in particular; they become weaker in proportion as\nthey are more numerous, and are easily kept in subjection by those\njust laws which prohibit riotous assemblies, mutual insults, and\nseditions, and which the legislative power will always properly\nsupport in their full vigor.\n\nWe know that there are several heads of families, who have acquired\ngreat fortunes in foreign countries, who would be glad to return to\ntheir native country. These require only the protection of the law\nof nature, to have their marriages remain valid and their children\nsecured in the enjoyment of their present property, and the right\nof succeeding to the inheritance of their fathers, together with\nprotection for their persons. They ask no public places of worship;\nthey aim not at the possession of civil employment, nor do they\naspire to dignities either in Church or State; for no Roman Catholics\ncan enjoy any of these, either in England or in any other Protestant\ncountry.[14] In this case, therefore, there is no occasion for\ngranting great privileges, or delivering strongholds into the hands\nof a faction, but only to suffer a quiet set of people to breathe\ntheir native air; to soften the rigor of some edicts, which in\nformer times might perhaps have been necessary, but at present are no\nlonger so. It is not for us to direct the ministry what it has to do;\nit is sufficient if we presume to plead the cause of an unfortunate\nand distressed people.\n\nMany and easy are the methods to render these people useful to the\nstate, and to prevent them from ever becoming dangerous; the wisdom\nof the legislature supported by the military force, will certainly\nfind out these methods, which other nations have employed with so\nmuch success.\n\nIt is certain that there is still a number of enthusiasts among the\nlower kind of Calvinists; but, on the other hand, it is no less\ncertain that there is still a greater number among the lower kind\nof bigoted Roman Catholics. The dregs of the madmen of St. M\u00e9dard\nare passed over unnoticed in the nation, while the greatest pains\nare taken to exterminate the Calvinist prophets. The most certain\nmeans to lessen the number of the mad of both sorts, if any still\nremain, is to leave them entirely to the care of reason, which will\ninfallibly enlighten the understanding in the long run, though\nshe may be slow in her operations. Reason goes mildly to work,\nshe persuades with humanity, she inspires mutual indulgence and\nforbearance, she stifles the voice of discord, establishes the rule\nof virtue and sobriety, and disposes those to pay a ready obedience\nto the laws who might start from the hand of power when exerted\nto enforce them. Besides, are we to hold for nothing that contempt\nand ridicule which enthusiasm everywhere meets with in the present\nenlightened age from persons of rank and education? This very\ncontempt is the most powerful barrier that can be opposed to the\nextravagancies of all sectaries. Past times are as though they never\nhad been. We should always direct our views from the point where we\nourselves at present are, and from that to which other nations have\nattained.\n\nThere has been a time in which it was thought a duty to issue edicts\nagainst all such as taught a doctrine contrary to the categories of\nAristotle, or who opposed the abhorrence of a vacuum, quiddities, or\nthe whole or the part of a thing. There are above a hundred volumes\nin Europe containing the writings of civilians against magic, and\nthe manner of distinguishing real sorcerers from pretended ones.\nThe excommunication of grasshoppers and other insects hurtful to\nthe fruits of the earth was formerly much in use, and is still to\nbe found in several rituals; that custom is now laid aside, and\nAristotle, with his sorcerers, and the grasshoppers are left to\nthemselves. Innumerable are the examples of these grave follies,\nwhich formerly were deemed of great importance; others have succeeded\nfrom time to time, but as soon as they have had their effect, and\npeople begin to grow weary of them, they pass away and are no more\nheard of. If any one were, at present, to take it into his head\nto turn Eutychian, Nestorian, or Manich\u00e6an, what would be the\nconsequence? We should laugh at him in the same manner as at a person\nwho should appear dressed after the ancient fashion, with a great\nruff and slashed sleeves.\n\nThe first thing that opened the eyes of our nation was when the\nJesuits Letellier and Doucin drew up the bull Unigenitus, and sent\nit to the Court of Rome, imagining they lived still in those times\nof ignorance in which people adopted, without examination, the most\nabsurd assertions. They even dared to proscribe a proposition, which\nis universally true in all cases and in all times, \u201cthat the dread\nof an unjust excommunication ought not to hinder any one from doing\nhis duty.\u201d This was, in fact, proscribing reason, the liberties of\nthe Gallican church, and the very foundation of all morality; it was\nsaying to mankind: \u201cGod commands you never to do your duty when you\nare apprehensive of suffering any injustice.\u201d Never was so gross\nan insult offered to common sense, and yet this never occurred to\nthese correspondents of the Church of Rome. Nay, they even persuaded\nthat court that this bull was necessary, that the nation desired it.\nAccordingly it was signed, sealed, and sent back to France; and every\none knows the consequences; assuredly, had they been foreseen, this\nbull would have been mitigated. Very warm disputes ensued upon it;\nbut, however, by the great prudence and goodness of the king, they\nwere at length appeased.\n\nIt is much the same with regard to most of those points in which the\nProtestants and we at present differ; some of them are of little\nor no consequence; others again are more serious; but even in\nthese latter, the rage of disputation is so far subsided that the\nProtestants nowadays no longer preach upon controversial points in\nany of their churches.\n\nLet us then seize this period of disgust or satiety for such matters,\nor, rather, indeed, of the prevalence of reason, as an epoch for\nrestoring the public tranquillity, of which it seems to be a pleasing\nearnest. Controversy, that epidemical malady, is now in its decline,\nand requires nothing more than a gentle regimen. In a word, it is\nthe interest of the state that these wandering sects, who have so\nlong lived as aliens to their father\u2019s house, on their returning\nin a submissive and peaceable manner, should meet with a favorable\nreception; humanity seems to demand this, reason advises it, and good\npolicy can have nothing to apprehend from it.\n\n\n CHAPTER VI.\n IF NON-TOLERATION IS AGREEABLE TO\n THE LAW OF NATURE AND OF SOCIETY.\n\nThe law of nature is that which nature points out to all mankind.\nYou have brought up a child, that child owes you a respect as its\nparent, and gratitude as its benefactor. You have a right over the\nproductions of the earth which you have raised by the labor of your\nown hands; you have given and received a promise; that promise ought\nto be kept.\n\nThe law of society can have no other foundation in any case than on\nthe law of nature. \u201cDo not that to another which thou wouldst not he\nshould do unto thee,\u201d is the great and universal principle of both\nthroughout the earth; now, agreeably to this principle, can one man\nsay to another: \u201cBelieve that which I believe, and which thou thyself\ncanst not believe, or thou shalt die?\u201d And yet this is what is every\nday said in Portugal, in Spain, and in Goa. In some other countries,\nindeed, they now content themselves with saying, \u201cBelieve as I do,\nor I will hold thee in abhorrence; believe like me, or I will do\nthee all the evil I can; wretch, thou art not of my religion, and\ntherefore thou hast no religion at all, and oughtest to be held in\nexecration by thy neighbors, thy city, and thy province.\u201d\n\nIf the law of society directs such a conduct, the Japanese ought\nthen to hold the Chinese in detestation; the latter the Siamese, who\nshould persecute the inhabitants of the Ganges; and they fall upon\nthose of India; the Mogul should put to death the first Malabar he\nfound in his kingdom; the Malabar should poniard the Persian; the\nPersian massacre the Turk; and, all together, should fall upon us\nChristians, who have so many ages been cutting one another\u2019s throats.\n\nThe law of persecution then is equally absurd and barbarous; it is\nthe law of tigers; nay, it is even still more savage, for tigers\ndestroy only for the sake of food, whereas we have butchered one\nanother on account of a sentence or a paragraph.\n\n\n CHAPTER VII.\n IF NON-TOLERATION WAS\n KNOWN AMONG THE GREEKS.\n\nThe several nations with which history has made us in part\nacquainted, all considered their different religions as ties by which\nthey were united; it was the association of human kind. There was a\nkind of law of hospitality among the gods, the same as among men. If\na stranger arrived in any town, the first thing he did was to pay his\nadoration to the gods of the country, even though they were the gods\nof his enemies. The Trojans offered up prayers even to those gods who\nfought for the Greeks.\n\nAlexander made a journey into the deserts of Libya, purposely to\nconsult the god Ammon, to whom the Greeks gave the name of Zeus and\nthe Latins that of Jupiter, though both countries had their Jupiter\nand their Zeus among themselves. When they sat down before any town\nor city, they offered up sacrifices and prayers to the gods of that\ncity or town, to render them propitious to their undertaking. Thus,\neven in the midst of war, religion united mankind; and though it\nmight sometimes prompt them to exercise the most inhuman cruelties,\nat other times it frequently softened their fury.\n\nI may be mistaken, but it seems to me that not one of all the\ncivilized nations of antiquity ever laid a restraint upon liberty\nof thinking. They all had a particular religion; but they seem to\nhave acted in this respect toward men in the same manner as they did\ntoward their gods; they all acknowledged one Supreme Being, though\nthey associated him with an infinite number of inferior deities;\nin like manner, though they had but one faith, yet they admitted a\nmultitude of particular systems.\n\nThe Greeks, for example, though a very religious people, were not\noffended with the Epicureans, who denied Providence and the existence\nof the soul, not to mention divers other sects, whose tenets were\nall of them repugnant to the pure ideas we ought to entertain of a\nCreator, and yet were all of them tolerated.\n\nSocrates, who came the nearest to the knowledge of the true God,\nis said to have suffered on that account, and died a martyr to\nthe Deity; he was the only one whom the Greeks ever put to death\non account of opinion. If this was really the cause of his being\ncondemned, it does very little honor to persecution, since he was put\nto death for being the only one who gave true glory to God, whilst\nthose who taught notions the most unworthy of the Deity were held\nin high honor; therefore, I think, the enemies of toleration should\nbe cautious how they lay a stress upon the infamous example of his\njudges.\n\nMoreover, it is evident from history that he fell a victim to the\nrevenge of an enraged party. He had made himself many inveterate\nenemies among the sophists, orators, and poets, who taught in the\npublic schools, and even among the preceptors who had the care of the\nchildren of distinction. He himself acknowledges in his discourse\nhanded down to us by Plato, that he went from house to house to\nconvince these preceptors that they were a set of ignorant fellows,\na conduct certainly unworthy of one who had been declared by an\noracle the wisest of mankind. A priest and one of the members of the\nAreopagus were let loose upon him, who accused him I cannot precisely\nsay of what, as his apology to me seems very vague; from which,\nhowever, we learn in general that he was charged with inspiring\nthe youth of the nation with notions contrary to the religion and\ngovernment of the country, an accusation which the slanderers of all\ntimes and places have constantly made use of; but a court of justice\nrequires positive facts, and that the charge should be circumstantial\nand well supported, none of which are to be found in the proceedings\nagainst Socrates. All we know is that he had at first two hundred and\ntwenty voices for him; therefore there must have been two hundred\nand twenty out of the five hundred judges who were philosophers, a\ngreat many more, I believe, than are to be found anywhere else. At\nlength, however, the majority were for the hemlock potion. But here\nlet us not forget, that when the Athenians came to their reason,\nthey held both his accusers and judges in detestation; made Melitus,\nwho had been the principal author of the sentence pronounced against\nhim, pay for that act of injustice with his life; banished all the\nothers concerned in it, and erected a temple to Socrates. Never\nwas philosophy so nobly avenged, so highly honored. This affair of\nSocrates then is, in fact, the most powerful argument that can be\nalleged against persecution. The Athenians had an altar dedicated to\nthe strange gods, gods they could never know. What stronger proof\nthen can there be, not only of their extreme indulgence towards all\nnations, but even of their respect for the religion of those nations?\n\nA very worthy person, who is neither an enemy to reason, learning,\nor probity, nor to his country, in undertaking to justify the affair\nof the massacre of St. Bartholomew, quotes the war of the Phocians,\nby them called the sacred war, as if that war had been entered into\non the score of religion, or a particular point in divinity, whereas\nit is well known that it was caused by a dispute about a particular\nspot of ground, the constant cause of all wars. A few corn-grounds\ncan certainly never be a symbol of belief; it is as certain that none\nof the Greek cities ever made war on one another for the sake of\nopinion. After all, what would this modest and humane writer drive\nat? Would he have us undertake a sacred war!\n\n\n CHAPTER VIII.\n WHETHER THE ROMANS\n ENCOURAGED TOLERATION.\n\nAmong the ancient Romans, from the days of Romulus to those in which\nthe Christians began to dispute with the priests of the empire, we\ndo not find a single instance of any person being persecuted on\naccount of his sentiments. Cicero doubted everything, Lucretius\ndenied everything, and yet neither the one nor the other underwent\nthe least reproach from their fellow-citizens; nay, so far did this\nlicence go, that Pliny, the naturalist, begins his book by denying\nthe existence of a God, and saying, that if there be one, it must be\nthe sun. Cicero, in speaking of hell, says: _Non est una tam excors\nqu\u00e6 credat_ (\u201cThere is not even an old woman so silly as to believe\nit\u201d). Juvenal says: _Nec pueri credunt_ (\u201cNor do the children believe\nit\u201d). And the following maxim was publicly repeated in the Roman\ntheatre: _Post mortem nihil est, ipsaque mors nihil_ (\u201cNaught after\ndeath; even death itself is naught\u201d). While we abhor these maxims,\nlet us pardon them in a people who were never enlightened by the holy\ntruths of the Gospel; and, while we own them to be false and impious,\nlet us, however, confess that the Romans were great friends to\ntoleration, seeing that such tenets never excited any commotions.\n\n_Deorum offensa diis cur\u00e6_, was the grand principle of the senate and\npeople of Rome, that illustrious nation employing their attention\nwholly to conquer, govern and civilize the universe. They were our\nlegislators as well as our conquerors; and even C\u00e6sar, who reduced\nus to his subjection, and gave us laws and games, never attempted to\ncompel us to quit our Druids for him, though supreme pontiff of a\nnation whose subjects we were now become.\n\nThe Romans themselves did not profess all kinds of religion,\ntherefore they did not give public sanction to all, but they\npermitted them. Under Numa nothing material was the object of their\nworship. They had neither statues nor pictures; in process of time,\nhowever, some were erected to the _Dii Majorum Gentium_, with which\nthe Greeks brought them into acquaintance. That law in the twelve\ntables, _Deos peregrinos ne colunto_, was confined to the allowing\nno public worship to be paid, except to the superior and inferior\ndeities, approved by the senate. The Egyptian goddess Isis had a\ntemple in Rome at the time of Tiberius, who demolished it because\nits priests, having been bribed by Mundus, suffered him to lie with\na lady called Paulina in the temple itself, under the name and form\nof the god Anubis. Indeed this story is to be found only in Josephus,\nwho did not live at that time, and was moreover a credulous and\nexaggerating writer; and there is very little probability that\nin so enlightened an age as that of Tiberius, a lady of the first\ndistinction in Rome could be so weak as to believe that a god\ncohabited with her.\n\nBut whether this anecdote be true or false, this one thing is\ncertain, that the Egyptian idolatry was in the possession of a temple\nin Rome with the public consent. The Jews had also lived as traders\nin that city ever since the Punic war; they had their synagogues\nthere in the time of Augustus, and almost always continued to have\nthem in the same manner as they now have in modern Rome. Can we\ndesire a stronger instance that the Romans looked upon toleration as\nthe most sacred of all the laws of nations?\n\nWe are told that as soon as the Christian religion began to make its\nappearance, its followers were persecuted by these very Romans who\npersecuted no one. This fact, however, appears to me to be evidently\nfalse, and I desire no better authority than that of St. Paul\nhimself. In the Acts of the Apostles[15] we are told that St. Paul,\nbeing accused by the Jews of attempting to overturn the Mosaic law by\nthat of Jesus Christ, St. James proposed to him to shave his head and\ngo into the temple with four Jews and purify himself with them, \u201cThat\nall men may know,\u201d says he, \u201cthat those things whereof they were\ninformed concerning thee, are nothing, but that thou thyself dost\nkeep the law of Moses.\u201d\n\nAccordingly, we find that St. Paul, though a Christian, submitted\nto perform these Jewish ceremonies for the space of seven days; but\nbefore the expiration of this time, the Jews of Asia, who knew him\nagain, seeing him in the temple, not only with Jews but Gentiles\nalso, cried out that he had polluted the holy place, and laid hands\nupon him, drew him out of the temple, and carried him before the\nGovernor Felix; they afterwards accused him at the judgment-seat of\nFestus, whither the Jews came in crowds demanding his death. But\nFestus answered them: \u201cIt is not the manner of the Romans to deliver\nany man to die, before that he which is accused have the accusers\nface to face, and have licence to answer for himself.\u201d[16]\n\nThese words of the Roman magistrate are the more remarkable as he\nappears to have been no favorer of St. Paul, but rather to have held\nhim in contempt, for, imposed upon by the false lights of his own\nreason, he took him for a person beside himself; nay, he expressly\nsays to him, \u201cMuch learning hath made thee mad.\u201d[17] Festus then was\nentirely guided by the equity of the Roman law in taking under his\nprotection a stranger for whom he could have no regard.\n\nHere then we have the word of God itself declaring that the Romans\nwere a just people, and no persecutors. Besides, it was not the\nRomans who laid violent hands on St. Paul, but the Jews. St. James,\nthe brother of Jesus, was stoned to death by order of a Sadducee Jew,\nand not by that of a Roman judge. It was the Jews alone who put St.\nStephen to death;[18] and though St. Paul held the clothes of those\nwho stoned him, he certainly did not act then as a Roman citizen.\n\nThe primitive Christians had certainly no cause of complaint against\nthe Romans; the Jews, from whom they at that time began to separate\nthemselves, were their only enemies. Every one knows the implacable\nhatred all sectaries bore to those who quit their sect. There\ndoubtless were several tumults in the synagogues in Rome. Suetonius,\nin his life of Claudius, has these words, _Jud\u00e6os impulsore Christo\nassidue tumultuantes Roma expulit_. He is wrong in saying that it\nwas at the instigation of Christ they raised commotions in Rome; but\nhe could not be acquainted with all the circumstances relating to\na people who were held in such contempt in Rome as the Jews were;\nand, however mistaken he may have been in this particular, yet he is\nright as to the occasion of these commotions. Suetonius wrote in the\nreign of Adrian in the second century, when the Christians were not\ndistinguished from the Jews by the Romans; therefore this passage\nof Suetonius is a proof that the Romans, so far from oppressing the\nprimitive Christians, chastised the Jews who persecuted them, being\ndesirous that the Jewish synagogue in Rome should show the same\nindulgence to its dissenting brethren as it received itself from\nthe Roman Senate; and we find from Dion Cassius and Ulpian, that\nthe Jews who were thus banished from Rome returned soon after, and\neven attained to several honors and dignities, notwithstanding the\nlaws which excluded them therefrom.[19] Can it be believed, that\nafter the destruction of Jerusalem, the emperors would have loaded\nthe Jews with their favors, and have persecuted and put to death the\nChristians, whom they looked upon as a sect of the Jews?\n\nNero is said to have been a great persecutor of the Christians. But\nTacitus tells us that they were accused of having set fire to the\ncity of Rome, and were thereupon given up to the resentment of the\npopulace. But had religion anything to do with this charge? No,\ncertainly. We might as well say that the Chinese, whom the Dutch\nmurdered a few years ago in Batavia, were slaughtered on account of\ntheir religion. And nothing but a strong desire to deceive ourselves\ncan possibly make us attribute to persecution the sufferings of a\nfew half-Jews and half-Christians under Nero.[20]\n\n\n\nSeveral Christians afterwards suffered martyrdom; it is not easy\nto say on what particular account they were condemned, but I can\nventure to assert that none suffered under the first C\u00e6sars merely on\nthe account of religion, for they tolerated all beliefs; therefore,\nwhy should they seek out and persecute an obscure people, who had a\nworship peculiar to themselves, at the time they licensed all others?\n\nThe Emperors Titus, Trajan, Antoninus, and Decius were not\nbarbarians; how then can we imagine that they would have deprived\nthe Christians alone of that liberty with which they indulged every\nother nation, or that they would even have troubled them for having\nconcealed mysteries, while the worshippers of Isis, Mithra, and the\nGoddess of Assyria, whose rites were all of them equally unknown\nto the Romans, were suffered to perform them without hindrance?\nCertainly, the persecutions the Christians suffered must have arisen\nfrom other causes, and from some private pique, enforced by reasons\nof state.\n\nFor instance, when St. Laurence refused to deliver to Cornelius\nSecularius, the Roman prefect, the money belonging to the Christians\nwhich he had in his custody, was it not very natural for the prefect\nand the emperor to be incensed at this refusal? They did not know\nthat St. Laurence had distributed this money among the poor, in acts\nof charity and benevolence; therefore they considered him only as a\nrefractory person, and punished him accordingly.[21]\n\nAgain, let us consider the martyrdom of St. Polyeuctes. Can he be\nsaid to have suffered on account of religion only? He enters a\ntemple, where the people are employed in offering thanksgivings to\ntheir gods on account of the victory gained by the Emperor Decius;\nhe insults the priests and overturns and breaks in pieces the altar\nand statues. Is there a country in the world where so gross an\ninsult would have been passed over? The Christian who publicly tore\nthe edict of the Emperor Diocletian, and by that act brought on the\ngreat persecution against his brethren in the two last years of this\nprince\u2019s reign, had not, surely, a zeal according to knowledge, but\nwas the unhappy cause of all the disasters that befell his party.\nThis inconsiderate zeal, which was often breaking forth, and was\ncondemned even by several of the Fathers of the Church, was probably\nthe occasion of all those persecutions we read of.\n\nCertainly, I would not make a comparison between the first\nsacramentarians and the primitive Christians, as error should never\nbe ranked in the same class with truth, but it is well known that\nFarrel, the predecessor of Calvin, did the very same thing at Arles\nwhich St. Polyeuctes had done before him in Armenia. The townsmen\nwere carrying the statue of St. Anthony, the hermit, in procession\nthrough the streets; Farrel and some of his followers in a fit of\nzeal fell upon the monks who were carrying the image, beat them, made\nthem take to their heels, and, having seized upon St. Anthony, threw\nhim into the river. Assuredly Farrel deserved death for this flagrant\noutrage upon the public peace, but he had the good luck to escape by\nflight. Now, had he only told those monks in the open streets that he\ndid not believe that a raven had brought half a loaf to St. Anthony,\nnor that this hermit had had conversation with centaurs and satyrs,\nhe would have deserved a severe reprimand for troubling the public\npeace; but if the night after the procession he had quietly examined\nthe story in his own room, no one could have found any fault with him\nfor it.\n\nBut, indeed, can we suppose that the Romans, after permitting the\ninfamous Antinous to be ranked among their demi-gods, would have\nmassacred and thrown to wild beasts those against whom they had no\nother cause of reproach than having peaceably worshipped a just\nDeity? Or would those very Romans, who worshipped a supreme and\nall-powerful God,[22] master of all the subordinate deities, and\ndistinguished by the title of _Deus optimus maximus_, would they, I\nsay, have persecuted such who professed to worship only one God?\n\nThere appears little reason to believe that there ever was an\ninquisition instituted against the Christians under the Roman\nemperors; I mean, that they were ever judicially examined on the\nsubject of their faith; neither do we find that Jew, Syrian, Egyptian\nbards, Druids, or philosophers were ever troubled on this account.\nThe primitive martyrs then were men who opposed the worship of false\ngods. But, however wise or pious they might be in rejecting the\nbelief of such absurd fictions, if, not content with worshipping the\ntrue God in spirit and in truth, they offered a violent and public\noutrage to the received religion of the government under which they\nlived, however absurd that religion might be, impartiality obliges us\nto confess that they themselves were the first persecutors.\n\nTertullian, in his Apology,[23] says that the Christians were\nlooked upon as a turbulent and seditious sect. This accusation is\ndoubtless unjust; but it serves to prove that the civil power did\nnot set itself against the Christians purely on account of their\nreligion. In another place,[24] he says that the Christians refused\nto adorn the doors of their houses with laurel branches on the days\nof public rejoicing for the victories of the emperors. Now this\nblamable particularity might not, without some reason, be taken for\ndisaffection to the government.\n\nThe first judicial act of severity we find exercised against\nthe Christians was that of Domitian; but this extended only to\nbanishment, which did not last above a year, for, says the author\nabove quoted, _Facile c\u0153ptum repressit restitutis quos ipse\nrelegaverat_. Lactantius, so remarkable for his passionate and\npompous style, acknowledges that from the time of Domitian to that\nof Decius the Church continued in a peaceable and flourishing\ncondition. This long tranquillity, says he,[25] was interrupted by\nthat execrable animal Decius, who began to oppress the Church: _Post\nmultos annos extitit execrabile animal Decius qui vexaret ecclesiam_.\n\nI shall not here enter into a discussion of the opinion of the\nlearned Mr. Dodwell concerning the small number of martyrs; but\nif the Romans had been such violent persecutors of the Christian\nreligion, if their senate had condemned so many of its innocent\nvotaries to perish by the most unheard-of tortures, plunging them\nalive in boiling oil, and exposing their wives and daughters naked\nto the wild beasts in the circus, how happened it that they suffered\nall the first bishops of Rome to live unmolested? St. Ireneus reckons\nonly one martyr among all these bishops, namely, Telesphorus, who\nsuffered in the year 139 of our vulgar era; nor have we any positive\nproof of this Telesphorus being put to death. Zephirinus governed the\nflock in Rome for eighteen years successively, and died peaceably in\nthe year 219. It is true that in the ancient martyrologies we find\nalmost all the first popes ranked as martyrs, but the word martyr is\nthere taken only in its original and true signification, which is a\nwitness and not a sufferer.\n\nMoreover, we can hardly reconcile this rage of persecution with\nthe liberty granted the Christians, of assembling no less than\nfifty-six councils in the course of the first three centuries, as is\nacknowledged by all ecclesiastical writers.\n\nThat there were persecutions, is doubtless; but if they had been as\nviolent as represented, it is hardly probable that Tertullian, who\nwrote with so much energy against the established religion, would\nhave been suffered to die peaceably in his bed. It is certain that\nnone of the emperors ever read his \u201cApology,\u201d as an obscure work\ncomposed in Africa can hardly be supposed to have come into the hands\nof the governors of the world; but then, it might have been shown to\ntheir proconsuls in Africa, and have drawn down their resentment upon\nthe author; nevertheless, we do not find that he suffered martyrdom.\n\nOrigen taught the Christian religion publicly in Alexandria, and yet\nwas not put to death for it. And this very Origen himself, who spoke\nwith so much freedom both to the heathens and the Christians, and\nwho, while he taught Jesus to the one, denied the triple Godhead to\nthe other, expressly acknowledges, in his third book against Celsus,\nthat \u201cThere were very few who suffered martyrdom, and those at a\ngreat distance of time from one another; notwithstanding,\u201d says he,\n\u201cthat the Christians leave nothing undone to make their religion\ngenerally embraced, running from city to city, and from town to town,\nto make converts.\u201d\n\nIt must be confessed that these continual peregrinations might\nreadily give cause to the priests, who were their enemies, to accuse\nthem of a design to raise disturbances; and yet we find that these\nmissions were tolerated even among the Egyptians, who have ever\nbeen a turbulent, factious, and mean people, and who tore a Roman\nto death for having killed a cat; in a word, a nation at all times\ncontemptible, whatever may have been said to the contrary by the\nadmirers of pyramids.[26]\n\nWhat person could do more to call down upon him the resentment of\nboth ecclesiastical and civil power than St. Gregory Thaumaturgos,\nthe disciple of Origen? This same St. Gregory had a vision during\nthe night-time, in which an old man appeared to him sent from God,\naccompanied by a woman shining with glory; the first of these was\nSt. John the Evangelist, and the other the Holy Virgin. St. John\ndictated to him a creed, which Gregory afterwards went about to\npreach. In his way he passed through Neo-C\u00e6sarea, where the rain\nobliged him to stay all night, and he took up his lodging near a\ntemple famous for its oracles. Here he made several signs of the\ncross. The high priest coming the next morning into the temple was\nsurprised to find that the oracle did not give its answer as usual,\nupon which he invoked the spirits of the place, who appearing, told\nhim that they could no longer inhabit that mansion, as St. Gregory\nhad passed a night there and had made signs of the cross, upon\nwhich the high priest caused Gregory to be seized, who gave him to\nunderstand that he could drive out or cause to enter the familiar\nspirits wherever he pleased. \u201cIf so,\u201d said the high priest, \u201cpray\nsend them back here again.\u201d Then St. Gregory, tearing a leaf from a\nlittle book he held in his hand, wrote these words upon it: \u201cGregory\nto Satan: I command thee to enter again into this temple.\u201d The paper\nbeing laid upon the altar, the demons, in obedience to the saint\u2019s\nmandate, gave their oracles that day as usual, after which they\nremained silent.\n\nThis story is related by St. Gregory of Nyssa in his life of St.\nGregory Thaumaturgos. Certainly, the idolatrous priests had great\nreason to be offended with St. Gregory, and might have delivered him\nover to the secular power as one who was their greatest enemy, and\nyet we do not find that they offered him any hurt.\n\nThe history of St. Cyprian informs us that he was the first bishop\nof Carthage who suffered martyrdom; this was A. D. 258, consequently\nno bishop of Carthage had been put to death on account of religion\nfor a great length of time. The history of this saint does not inform\nus what charge was brought against him, who were his enemies, or how\nhe incurred the displeasure of the proconsul of Africa. We find St.\nCyprian thus writing to Cornelius, bishop of Rome: \u201cThere has been\na tumult of the people lately at Carthage, in which it was twice\nproposed to throw me to the lions.\u201d It might possibly happen that\nthe blind resentment of the people of Carthage did at length cause\nCyprian to be put to death, for, certainly, he was never condemned\nto suffer for his religion by the Emperor Gallus, who lived at so\ngreat a distance, and, moreover, permitted Cornelius to exercise his\nepiscopal function under his very eye.\n\nSo many and various are the hidden causes that are frequently blended\nwith the apparent one, in the persecution of an individual, that it\nis hardly possible for posterity to discover the true source of the\nmisfortunes that befell even the most considerable personages, much\nless that of the sufferings of a private person, hardly known to any\nbut those of his own sect.\n\nAnd here let it be observed that neither St. Gregory Thaumaturgos\nnor St. Denis, bishop of Alexandria, who were both contemporaries of\nSt. Cyprian, suffered the slightest persecution. How then happened\nit that, being certainly as well known as the bishop of Carthage,\nthey were suffered to live unmolested, while he was delivered over\nto punishment? May we not fairly infer that the one fell a victim to\npersonal and powerful enemies, either in consequence of a malicious\naccusation, or from reasons of state, which frequently interfere in\nreligious matters, while the other had the good fortune to escape the\ndesigns of wicked men?\n\nWe cannot, with any degree of probability, suppose that the charge\nof being a Christian was the only cause of St. Ignatius being put to\ndeath, under the just and merciful Trajan, since we find that several\nof his own religion were suffered to accompany and minister comfort\nto him on his way to Rome.[27] There had been frequent seditions\nin Antioch, a city remarkable for the turbulent disposition of\nits inhabitants; here Ignatius privately acted as bishop over the\nChristians. It might happen that some of these disturbances, being\nmaliciously imputed to the innocent Christians, had occasioned the\ngovernment to take cognizance of them, and that the judge might have\nbeen mistaken, as it often happens.\n\nSt. Simeon, for example, was accused before King Sapor of being a\nspy to the Romans. The history of his martyrdom tells us that Sapor\nproposed to him to worship the sun, whereas every one knows that the\nPersians paid no divine honors to that planet, but only considered\nit as an emblem of the good principle, the Orasmades, or Sovereign\nCreator, whom they all adored.\n\nAny one of the least tolerating spirit cannot help his indignation\nfrom rising against those writers who accused Diocletian of\npersecuting the Christians after his accession to the empire. Here\nwe need only refer to Eusebius of C\u00e6sarea, whose testimony certainly\ncannot be rejected. The favorite, the panegyrist of Constantine, and\nthe declared enemy of the emperors his predecessors, is certainly\nentitled to our credit when he justifies those very emperors. The\nfollowing are his own words:[28]\n\n\u201cThe emperors had for a long time given the Christians great marks of\ntheir favor and benevolence; they had entrusted them with the care\nof whole provinces; many of them lived within the imperial palace;\nand some of the emperors even married Christian women; Diocletian, in\nparticular, espoused Prisca, whose daughter was wife to Maximianus\nGalerius,\u201d etc.\n\nLet this authentic testimony make us cautious how we fall too readily\ninto calumny; and from this let any impartial person judge, if the\npersecution raised by Galerius, after nineteen years of continued\nclemency and favor to the Christians, must not have been occasioned\nby some intrigues with which we are at present unacquainted.\n\nFrom this also we may perceive the absurdity of that fabulous story\nof the Theban legion, said to have been all massacred for their\nreligion. Can anything be more ridiculous than to make this legion\nbe brought from Asia by the great St. Bernard? It is altogether\nimpossible that this legion should have been sent for from Asia to\nquiet a tumult in Gaul, a year after that tumult was suppressed,\nand not less so that six thousand foot and seven hundred horse\nshould have suffered themselves to be all murdered in a place where\ntwo hundred men only might have kept off a whole army. The account\nof this pretended butchery is introduced with all the marks of\nimposture: \u201cWhen the earth groaned under the tyranny of Diocletian,\nheaven was peopled with martyrs.\u201d Now, this event, such as it is\nrelated, is supposed to have happened in 286, the very time in which\nDiocletian most favored the Christians, and that the Roman Empire\nwas in a state of the greatest tranquillity. But to cut short this\nmatter at once, no such legion as the Theban ever existed; the Romans\nwere too haughty and too wise to form a corps of those Egyptians, who\nserved only as slaves in Rome, _Vern\u00e6 Canopi_; we may as well suppose\nthem to have had a Jewish legion. We have the names of two and thirty\nlegions that formed the principal military force of the Roman Empire,\nand it is very certain the Theban legion is not to be found among\nthem. In a word, we may rank this story with the acrostic verses of\nthe Sibyls, which are said to have foretold the miracles wrought by\nJesus Christ, and with many other like spurious productions, which\nfalse zeal has trumped up to impose upon credulity.\n\n\n CHAPTER X.\n THE DANGER OF FALSE LEGENDS AND PERSECUTION.\n\nMankind has been too long imposed upon by falsehood; it is therefore\ntime that we should come to the knowledge of the few truths that can\nbe distinguished from amidst the clouds of fiction which cover Roman\nhistory from the times of Tacitus and Suetonius, and with which the\nannals of the other nations of antiquity have almost always been\nobscured.\n\nCan any one, for example, believe that the Romans, a grave and\nmodest people, could have condemned Christian virgins, the children\nof persons of the first quality, to common prostitution? This is\nassuredly very inconsistent with the noble austerity of that nation\nfrom whom we received our laws, and who punished so rigorously the\nleast transgression of chastity in their vestals. These shameful\nstories may indeed be found in the _Actes Sinc\u00e8res_ of Ruinart. But\nshould we believe those acts before the \u201cActs of the Apostles\u201d? The\n_Actes Sinc\u00e8res_ tell us from Bollandus that there were in the city\nof Ancira seven Christian virgins, each of them upwards of seventy,\nwhom the governor, Theodectes, ordered to be deflowered by the\nyoung men of the place; but these poor maidens having escaped this\ndisaster\u2014as indeed there was great reason they should\u2014he compelled\nthem to assist stark naked at the mysteries of Diana, at which, by\nthe way, no one ever assisted but in a veil. St. Theodotus, who,\nthough indeed nothing more than an innkeeper, was not the less pious\nfor that, besought God devoutly that he would be pleased to take away\nthe lives of these holy maidens lest they should yield to temptation.\nGod heard his prayer. The governor ordered them all to be thrown into\na lake with stones about their necks; immediately after which they\nappeared to Theodotus, and begged of him, \u201cthat he would not suffer\ntheir bodies to be devoured by the fishes.\u201d These, it seems, were\ntheir own words.\n\nHereupon the innkeeper saint and some of his companions went in the\nnight-time to the side of the lake, which was guarded by a party of\nsoldiers, a heavenly torch going all the way before, to light them.\nWhen they came to the place where the guards were posted, they saw\na heavenly horseman armed cap-a-pie, with a lance in his hand, who\nfell upon the soldiers and dispersed them, while St. Theodotus drew\nthe dead bodies of the virgins out of the water. He was afterwards\ncarried before the governor, who ordered his head to be struck off,\nwithout the heavenly horseman interfering to prevent it. However\ndisposed we may be to pay all due reverence to the true martyrs of\nour holy religion, we must confess it is very hard to believe the\nstory of Bollandus and Ruinart.\n\nNeed I add to this the legend of young St. Romanus? Eusebius tells\nus, that having been condemned to be burnt, he was accordingly thrown\ninto the fire, when some Jews, who were present, made a mock of\nJesus Christ, who suffered his followers to be burnt when God had\ndelivered Shadrac, Meshach, and Abednego out of the fiery furnace.\nNo sooner had the Jews uttered this blasphemy than they beheld St.\nRomanus walking triumphant and unhurt forth from the flaming pile;\nthis being reported to the emperor, he gave orders for his being\npardoned, telling the judge that he would not have an affair upon\nhis hands with God\u2014a strange expression for Diocletian! The judge,\nhowever, notwithstanding the emperor\u2019s clemency, ordered St. Romanus\nto have his tongue cut out; and, though he had executioners at hand,\ncommanded the operation to be performed by a surgeon. Young Romanus,\nwho had from his birth labored under an impediment of speech, no\nsooner lost his tongue than he spoke distinctly, and with great\nvolubility. Upon this, the surgeon received a severe reprimand; when,\nin order to show that he had performed his operation, _secundum\nartem_, he laid hold of a man who was going by, from whom he cut just\nthe same portion of tongue as he had done from St. Romanus, on which\nthe patient instantly died, for, adds our author very learnedly,\n\u201cAnatomy teaches us that a man cannot live without his tongue.\u201d If\nEusebius did really write such stuff, and it has not been added by\nsome other hand, what degree of credit can we give to his history?\n\nWe have the relation of the martyrdom of St. Felicitas and her seven\nchildren, who are said to have been condemned to death by the wise\nand pious Antoninus, but without giving us the author\u2019s name, who,\nmost probably, possessed of more zeal than veracity, had a mind to\nimitate the history of the Maccabees. He begins his relation in the\nfollowing manner: \u201cSt. Felicitas was by birth a Roman, and lived in\nthe reign of Antoninus.\u201d It is clear by these words that the author\ndid not live at the same time with St. Felicitas. He says that they\nwere judged before the pr\u00e6tor in the Campus Martius, whereas the\nRoman prefect\u2019s tribunal was not in the Campus Martius, but in the\nCapitol, for, although the Comitia had been held there formerly, yet\nat this time it was used only as a place for reviewing the soldiers,\nfor chariot races, and for military games. This alone is sufficient\nto detect the fiction.\n\nThe author adds furthermore, that after sentence was passed, the\nemperor committed the care of seeing it executed to different judges,\na circumstance which is entirely repugnant to the usual forms in\nthose times, and in every other.\n\nWe also read of St. Hippolytus, who is said to have been drawn in\npieces by horses, as was Hippolytus, the son of Theseus. But a\npunishment of this kind was not known among the ancient Romans; and\nthis fabulous story took its rise wholly from the similitude of names.\n\nAnd here we may make one observation, that in the multitude of\nmartyrologies, composed wholly by the Christians themselves, we\nalmost always read of a great number of them coming of their own\naccord into the prison of their condemned brother, following him\nto execution, saving the blood as it flows from him, burying his\ndead body and performing miracles with his relics. Now, if the\npersecution was levelled only at the religion, would not the authors\nof it have destroyed those who thus openly declared themselves\nChristians, administered comfort and assistance to their brethren\nunder sentence, and were moreover, charged with working enchantments\nwith their inanimate remains? Would they not have treated them as\nwe have treated several different sects of Protestants, whom we\nhave butchered and burnt by hundreds, without distinction of age or\nsex? Is there amongst all the authenticated accounts of the ancient\npersecutions a single instance like that of St. Bartholomew, and\nthe massacre in Ireland? Is there one that comes near to the annual\nfestival, which is still celebrated at Toulouse, and which for its\ncruelty deserves to be forever abolished, where the inhabitants of a\nwhole city go in procession to return thanks to God, and felicitate\none another, for having, two hundred years ago, massacred upwards of\nfour thousand of their fellow subjects?\n\nWith horror I say it, but it is an undoubted truth, that we, who\ncall ourselves Christians, have been persecutors, executioners, and\nassassins! And of whom? Of our own brethren. It is we who have razed\na hundred towns to their foundations with the crucifix or Bible in\nour hands, and who have continually persevered in shedding torrents\nof blood, and lighting the fires of persecution, from the reign of\nConstantine to the time of the religious horrors of the cannibals\nwho inhabited the C\u00e9vennes; horrors which, praised be God, no longer\nexist.\n\nIndeed, we still see at times some miserable wretches of the more\ndistant provinces sent to the gallows on account of religion.\nSince the year 1745 eight persons have been hanged of those called\npredicants or ministers of the gospel, whose only crime was that of\nhaving prayed to God for their king in bad French, and giving a drop\nof wine, and a morsel of leavened bread, to a few ignorant peasants.\nNothing of all this is known in Paris, where pleasure engrosses the\nwhole attention, and where they are ignorant of everything that\npasses, not only in foreign kingdoms, but even in the more distant\nparts of their own. The trials in these cases frequently take up less\ntime than is used to condemn a deserter. The king wants only to be\ninformed of this, and he would certainly extend his mercy on such\noccasions.\n\nWe do not find that the Roman Catholic priests are treated in this\nmanner in any Protestant country: there are above a hundred of\nthem,[29] both in England and Ireland, publicly known to be such, and\nwho have yet been suffered to live peaceably and unmolested, even\nduring the last war.\n\nShall we then always be the last to adopt the wholesome sentiments\nof other nations? They have corrected their errors, when shall we\ncorrect ours? It has required sixty years to make us receive the\ndemonstrations of the great Newton: we have but just begun to dare\nto save the lives of our children by inoculation, and it is but of\nvery late date that we have put in practice the true principles\nof agriculture; when shall we begin to put in practice the true\nprinciples of humanity, or with what face can we reproach the\nheathens with having made so many martyrs, when we ourselves are\nguilty of the same cruelties in the like circumstances?\n\nLet it be allowed that the Romans put to death a number of Christians\non account of their religion only: if so, the Romans were highly\nblamable; but shall we commit the same injustice, and while we\nreproach them for their persecutions, be persecutors ourselves?\n\nIf there should be any one so destitute of honesty, or so blinded\nwith enthusiasm, as to ask me here, why I thus undertake to lay open\nour errors and faults, and to destroy the credit of all our false\nmiracles and fictitious legends, which serve to keep alive the zeal\nand piety of many persons; and should such a person tell me that some\nerrors are absolutely necessary; that, like ulcers, they give a vent\nto the humors of the body, and by being taken away would compass its\ndestruction, thus would I answer him:\n\n\u201cAll those false miracles by which you shake the credit due to real\nones, the numberless absurd legends with which you clog the truths\nof the Gospel, serve only to extinguish the pure flame of religion\nin our hearts.\u201d There are too many persons, who, desirous of being\ninstructed, but not having the time for acquiring instruction, say:\n\u201cThe teachers of my religion have deceived me, therefore there is no\nreligion: it is better to throw myself into the arms of Nature than\nthose of Error; and I had rather place my dependence on her law than\nin the inventions of men.\u201d Others again unhappily go still greater\nlengths; they perceive that imposture has put a bridle in their\nmouths, and therefore will not submit even to the necessary curb of\ntruth; they incline towards atheism, and run into depravity because\nothers have been impostors and persecutors.\n\nSuch are undeniably the consequences of pious frauds and\nsuperstitious fopperies. Mankind in general reason but by halves:\nit is certainly a very vicious way of arguing to say, that because\nthe golden legend of Voraginus, and the \u201cFlower of Saints\u201d of the\nJesuit Ribadeneira, abound in nothing but absurdities, therefore\nthere is no God: that the Catholics have massacred a great number\nof Huguenots, and the Huguenots in their turn have murdered a great\nnumber of Catholics, therefore there is no God: that certain bad men\nhave made use of confession, the holy communion, and all the other\nsacraments, as a means for perpetrating the most atrocious crimes,\nand therefore there is no God. For my part, I, on the contrary,\nshould conclude from thence that there is a God, who after this\ntransitory life, in which we have wandered so far from the true\nknowledge of Him, and have seen so many crimes committed under the\nsanction of His holy name, will at length deign to comfort us for the\nmany dreadful calamities we have suffered in this life; for if we\nconsider the many religious wars, and the forty papal schisms, which\nhave almost all of them been bloody; if we reflect upon the multitude\nof impostures, which have almost all proved fatal; the irreconcilable\nanimosities excited by differences in opinions, and the numberless\nevils occasioned by false zeal, I cannot but believe that men have\nfor a long time had their hell in this world.\n\n\n CHAPTER XI.\n ILL CONSEQUENCES OF NON-TOLERATION.\n\nWhat! it may then be demanded, shall every one be allowed to believe\nonly his own reason, and to think that his reason, whether true or\nfalse, should be the guide of his actions? Yes, certainly, provided\nhe does not disturb the peace of the community; for man has it not in\nhis power to believe or disbelieve;[30] but he has it in his power\nto pay a proper respect to the established customs of his country;\nand if we say that it is a crime not to believe in the established\nreligion, we ourselves condemn the primitive Christians, our\nforefathers, and justify those whom we accuse of having put them to\ndeath.\n\nIt may be replied, that the difference here is very great, because\nall other religions are of men, whereas the Catholic, Apostolic,\nand Roman Church is of God alone. But let me seriously ask, whether\nthe divine origin of our religion is a reason for establishing it\nby hatred, rage, banishment, confiscation of goods, imprisonment,\ntortures, and murder, and by solemn acts of thanksgiving to the Deity\nfor such outrages? The more assured we are of the divine authority of\nthe Christian religion, the less does it become weak man to enforce\nthe observance of it: if it is truly of God, God will support it\nwithout man\u2019s assistance. Persecution never makes any but hypocrites\nor rebels; a shocking alternative! Besides, ought we to endeavor to\nestablish, by the bloody hand of the executioner, the religion of\nthat God who fell by such hands, and who, while on earth, taught only\nmercy and forbearance?\n\nAnd here let us consider a while, the dreadful consequences of the\nright of non-toleration; if it were permitted us to strip of his\npossessions, to throw into prison, or to take away the life of a\nfellow-creature, who, born under a certain degree of latitude, did\nnot profess the generally received religion of that latitude, what\nis there which would exempt the principal persons of the state from\nfalling under the like punishments? Religion equally binds the\nmonarch and the beggar. Accordingly, we know that upwards of fifty\ndoctors or monks have maintained this execrable doctrine: that it\nwas lawful to depose, or even to kill, such princes as did not agree\nwith the established church; and we also know, that the several\nparliaments of the kingdom have on every occasion condemned these\nabominable decisions of still more abominable divines.[31]\n\nThe blood of Henry the Great was still reeking on the sword of his\nmurderer, when the Parliament of Paris issued an arret to establish\nthe independence of the crown as a fundamental law; whilst Cardinal\nDuperron, who owed his elevation to that prince, opposed this decree\nin an assembly of the states, and got it suppressed. The following\nexpression, made use of on this occasion by Duperron, is to be found\nin all the historical tracts of these times: \u201cShould a prince,\u201d says\nhe, \u201cturn Arian, it would be necessary to depose him.\u201d\n\nBut here I must beg the cardinal\u2019s pardon; for let us for a while\nadopt his chimerical supposition, and say, that one of our kings\nhaving read the \u201cHistory of the Councils and of the Fathers,\u201d and\nbeing struck with these words, \u201cMy Father is greater than I,\u201d and\ntaking them in too literal a sense, should be divided between the\nCouncil of Nice and that of Constantinople, and adopt the opinion of\nEusebius of Nicomedia: yet I should not be the less obliged to obey\nmy king, nor think the oath of allegiance I had taken to him less\nbinding; and if you, Mr. Cardinal, should dare to oppose him, and\nI were one of your judges, I should, without scruple, declare you\nguilty of high treason.\n\nDuperron carried this dispute much further; but I shall cut it very\nshort, by saying with every good citizen, that I should not look upon\nmyself as bound to obey Henry IV. because he was king; but because he\nheld the crown by the incontestable right of birth, and as the just\nreward of his virtue and magnanimity.\n\nPermit me then to say, that every individual is entitled by the same\nright to enjoy the inheritance of his father, and that he in no wise\ndeserves to be deprived of it, or to be sent to the gallows, because\nhe may perhaps be of the opinion of Ratram against Paschasius\nRatberg, or of Berengarius against Scotus.\n\nWe are very sensible that there are many of our tenets which have\nnot been always clearly explained: Jesus Christ not having expressly\ntold us in what manner the Holy Ghost really proceeds, both the Latin\nchurch and the Greek believed that it proceeded only from the Father;\nbut afterwards an article was added to the Creed in which it is said\nto proceed from the Son also. Now, I desire to know whether the day\nafter this new article was added a person who might abide by the old\nCreed would have been deserving of death? And is there less cruelty\nor injustice in punishing at this day a person who may possibly think\nas they did two or three centuries ago? Or was there any crime in\nbelieving in the time of Honorius I. that Christ had not two wills?\n\nIt is but very lately that the belief of the immaculate conception\nhas been established: the Dominicans have not received it as yet. Now\nwill any one tell me the precise point of time when the Dominicans\nwill begin to deserve punishment in this world, and in that which is\nto come?\n\nIf any one can set us an example for our conduct, it is certainly the\nApostles and the Evangelists. There was sufficient matter to excite\na violent schism between St. Peter and St. Paul. The latter, in his\nEpistle to the Galatians,[32] says: \u201cThat he withstood Peter to the\nface, because he was to be blamed; for before that certain men came\nfrom James, he did eat with the Gentiles: but when they were come,\nhe withdrew and separated himself, fearing them which were of the\ncircumcision, insomuch that Barnabas also was carried away with his\ndissimulation.\u201d \u201cBut,\u201d adds he, \u201cwhen I saw that they walked not\nuprightly, according to the truth of the Gospel, I said unto Peter\nbefore them all, If thou, being a Jew, livest after the manner of\nGentiles, and not as do the Jews, why compellest thou the Gentiles to\nlive as do the Jews?\u201d\n\nHere now was a subject for a violent dispute. The question was,\nwhether the new Christians followed the manners of the Jews or not.\nSt. Paul at that very time sacrificed in the Temple of Jerusalem; and\nwe know that the first fifteen bishops of Jerusalem were circumcised\nJews; and that they observed the Sabbath, and abstained from the\nmeats forbidden by the Jewish law. Should a bishop of Spain or\nPortugal at this time be circumcised, or observe the Sabbath, he\nwould assuredly burn at an _auto da f\u00e9_: and yet this fundamental\npoint did not occasion the least animosity between the Apostles, or\nbetween the primitive Christians.\n\nIf the Evangelists had resembled our modern writers, what an immense\nfield was there for disputation between them. St. Matthew reckons\nonly eight and twenty generations from David to Jesus. St. Luke\nreckons forty-one; and these generations are absolutely different.\nYet no dissension appears to have arisen between the disciples\non account of these apparent contradictions, which have been so\nadmirably well reconciled by the Fathers of the Church; but they\nstill continued in brotherly love, peace, and charity with one\nanother. What more noble lesson can we have of indulgence in our\ndisputes, and of humility in regard to those things which we do not\nunderstand?\n\nSt. Paul, in his Epistle to certain Jews of Rome who had been\nconverted to Christianity, employs all the latter part of his third\nchapter in telling them that by faith alone they will be glorified,\nand that no man is justified by good works only. St. James, on the\ncontrary, in the second chapter of his Epistle to the twelve tribes\ndispersed over the earth, is continually preaching up to them, that\nwithout good works no man can be saved. This has occasioned the\nseparation of two great communions amongst us; but it caused no\ndivision among the Apostles.\n\nIf the persecuting of those who differ from us in opinion is a holy\naction, it must be confessed that he who had murdered the greatest\nnumber of heretics would be the most glorious saint in heaven. If\nso, what a pitiful figure would a man who had only stripped his\nbrethren of all they had, and thrown them to rot in a dungeon, make,\nin comparison with the zealot who had butchered his hundreds on the\nfamous day of St. Bartholomew? This may be proved as follows:\n\nThe successor of St. Peter and his consistory cannot err; they\napproved, they celebrated, they consecrated the action of St.\nBartholomew; consequently that action was holy and meritorious;\nand, by a like deduction, he who of two murderers, equal in piety,\nhad ripped up the bellies of eighty Huguenot women big with child\nwould be entitled to double the portion of glory of another who had\nbutchered but twelve; in this manner, by the same argument also, the\nenthusiasts of the C\u00e9vennes have reason to believe that they will\nbe exalted in glory in proportion to the number of Catholic women,\npriests and monks whom they may have knocked on the head: but surely\nthese are strange claims to eternal happiness.\n\n\n CHAPTER XII.\n IF NON-TOLERATION WAS PART OF THE DIVINE LAW\n AMONG THE JEWS, AND WHETHER IT WAS ALWAYS\n PUT IN PRACTICE.\n\nBy the divine law, I take to be understood those rules and precepts\nwhich have been given to us by God Himself. For example, he ordained\nthat the Jews should eat a lamb dressed with bitter herbs, and\nstanding with a staff in their hand, in remembrance of the Passover;\nthat the consecration of the high-priest should be performed by\ntouching the tip of his right ear, his right hand, and his right foot\nwith blood; that the scapegoat should be charged with the sins of the\npeople: he also forbade the eating of all shellfish, swine, hares,\nhedgehogs, owls, the heron, and the lapwing.[33]\n\nHe also instituted their several feasts and ceremonies; and all those\nthings which appeared arbitrary to other nations, and subjected to\npositive law and custom, when commanded by God Himself, became a\ndivine law to the Jews, in like manner as whatever Jesus Christ the\nSon of Mary and the Son of God has commanded us is to us a divine law.\n\nBut here let us not presume to inquire wherefore it has pleased God\nto substitute a new law in the room of that given to Moses, and\nwherefore He commanded Moses more things than he did the patriarch\nAbraham, and Abraham more than Noah.[34] In this he seems, with\ninfinite condescension, to have accommodated himself to times and\nthe state of population amongst the inhabitants of the earth; and in\nthis gradation, to have shown his paternal love: but these are depths\ntoo profound for our weak faculties to measure; I shall therefore\nconfine myself to my subject, and proceed to examine the state of\nnon-toleration among the Jews.\n\nIt is certain, that in Exodus, Numbers, Leviticus, and Deuteronomy we\nfind several very rigorous laws and severe punishments in relation\nto religious worship. Several able commentators have been greatly\npuzzled to reconcile these books of Moses with several passages in\nthe prophets Jeremiah and Amos, and with the famous discourse of\nSt. Stephen, as related in the Acts of the Apostles. Amos says that\nthe Jews constantly worshipped in the wilderness, Moloch and Chiun,\ngods whom they had made to themselves.[35] And Jeremiah expressly\nsays, that God commanded not their fathers concerning burnt-offerings\nor sacrifices in the day that he brought them out of the land of\nEgypt.[36] And St. Stephen, in his discourse to the Jews previously\nmentioned, says: \u201cThey worshipped the host of heaven, and that they\nneither offered sacrifices nor slew beasts, for the space of forty\nyears in the wilderness, but took up the tabernacle of Moloch and the\nstar of their god Remphan.\u201d[37]\n\nOther critics again infer from the worship of so many strange gods\nhere mentioned, that the Israelites were indulged with having these\ngods by Moses; and in support of their opinion they quote the\nfollowing words in Deuteronomy: \u201cWhen ye shall enter into the land\nof Canaan, ye shall not do after all the things that we do here this\nday, every man whatsoever is right in his own eyes.\u201d[38][39]\n\nAnd as a further proof, they say that there is no mention made of\nany religious act of the people of Israel while in the wilderness;\nneither the celebration of the Passover, nor of the Feast of the\nTabernacles, nor of any public form of worship being established, nor\neven the practice of circumcision, the seal of the covenant made by\nGod with Abraham.\n\nThey likewise refer to the history of Joshua, where this great\nconqueror thus addresses the Jews: \u201cIf it seem evil unto you to\nserve the Lord, choose you this day whom you will serve; whether\nthe gods which your fathers served in Mesopotamia or the gods of\nthe Amorites, in whose land ye dwell:\u201d and the people said, \u201cNay,\nbut we will serve the Lord our God (Adonai).\u201d And Joshua said unto\nthe people, \u201cYe have chosen, now therefore put away the strange\ngods which are among you.\u201d Hence, say they, it is evident that the\nIsraelites had other gods besides the Lord (Adonai) under Moses.\n\nIt is altogether needless to take up the reader\u2019s time with an\nattempt to refute the opinions of those critics who think that\nthe Pentateuch was not written by Moses. This subject has been\nsufficiently discussed long ago; and, even admitting that some few\nparts of it were written in the times of the Judges, the Kings, or\nthe Prophets, it would not make the whole less inspired or divine.\nIt is sufficient, in my opinion, if the Holy Scripture proves to\nus, that, notwithstanding the extraordinary punishments which the\nJews called down upon themselves by their idolatrous worship of the\ngolden calf, they continued for a long time to enjoy perfect liberty\nof conscience; and it is even probable, that Moses, after having\nmassacred the twenty-three thousand, in the first transports of his\nrage against his brother and them for having erected this idol,\nfinding that nothing was to be gained by such severity in matters of\nreligion, was glad to wink at the fondness the people expressed for\nstrange gods.\n\nAnd indeed he himself appears soon after to have transgressed the\nvery law which he had given:[40] for, notwithstanding his having\nforbidden all molten or graven images, we find him erecting the\nbrazen serpent. And this law was again dispensed with by Solomon\nin the building of his temple; where that prince caused twelve\nbrazen bulls to be placed as supporters to the great Laver; as also\ncherubim in the ark, which had two heads, one of an eagle and the\nother of a calf; and it was probable from this latter head, badly\nmade, and found in the temple by the Roman soldiers at the time\nof their plundering of it, that the Jews were so long reported to\nhave worshipped an ass. Moreover, notwithstanding the repeated\nprohibitions against the worship of false gods, Solomon, though\ngiving way to the grossest idolatry, lived and died in peace.\nJeroboam, to whom God himself gave ten parts out of twelve of the\nkingdom, set up two golden calves, and yet reigned two and twenty\nyears, having united in his person the twofold dignity of monarch and\nof high-priest. The petty people of Jud\u00e6a erected altars and images\nto strange gods under Rehoboam. Pious King Aza suffered the high\nplaces to remain undemolished. And lastly, Uriah, the high-priest,\nerected a brazen altar, which had been sent to him by the king of\nSyria, in the temple, in the place of the altar of burnt-offerings.\nIn a word, we do not anywhere find the least constraint in point of\nreligion among the Jews; it is true, indeed, that they frequently\ndestroyed and murdered one another; but that was from motives of\npolitical concern, and not about the modes of belief. It is true,\nthat among the prophets we find some making heaven a party in their\nvengeance. Elias, for instance, calls down fire from heaven to\nconsume the priests of Baal. And Elisha sent bears to devour two and\nforty little children for calling him baldhead. But these miracles\nare very rare in their kind, and it would moreover be somewhat\ninhuman to desire to imitate them. We are also told that the Jews\nwere a most ignorant and cruel people; and that in their war with\nthe Midianites[41] they were commanded by Moses to kill all the\nmale children and all the child-bearing women, and to divide the\nspoil.[42] They found in the enemy\u2019s camp 675,000 sheep, 72,000\noxen, 61,000 asses, and 32,000 young maidens, and they took all the\nspoil and slew the captives. Several commentators will have it, that\nthirty-two of the young women were sacrificed to the Lord. \u201cThe\nLord\u2019s tribute was thirty and two persons.\u201d[43]\n\nIt is evident that the Jews offered human sacrifices to God; witness\nthat of Jephthah\u2019s daughter,[44] and of King Agag hewed in pieces by\nthe prophet Samuel.[45] And we find the prophet Ezekiel promising\nthem, by way of encouragement, that they should feast upon human\nflesh: \u201cYe shall eat of the flesh of the horse, and of his rider,\nand ye shall drink the blood of the princes of the earth.\u201d[46] But\nalthough the history of this people does not furnish us with one\nsingle act of generosity, magnanimity, or humanity, yet amidst so\nlong and dismal a night of barbarism, there is continually breaking\nforth a cheering ray of universal toleration.\n\nJephthah, who was inspired of God, and who sacrificed to him his\ndaughter, says to the chief of the Amorites, \u201cWilt not thou possess\nthat which Chemosh thy god giveth thee to possess? so whomsoever the\nLord our God shall drive from before us, them will we possess.\u201d[47]\nThis declaration is express, and might be carried to a great length;\nhowever, it is at least an evident proof that God permitted the\nworship of Chemosh. For the words of the Holy Scripture are not\n\u201c_Thou thinkest_ thou hast a right to possess that which thy god\nChemosh giveth thee to possess,\u201d but expressly, \u201c_Thou hast_ a right\nto possess,\u201d etc., for that is the true interpretation of the Hebrew\nwords _Otho thirasch_.\n\nThe story of Micah and the Levite, related in the seventeenth\nand eighteenth chapters of the Book of Judges, is a still more\nincontestable proof of this extensive toleration and liberty of\nconscience allowed among the Jews. The mother of Micah having lost\neleven hundred shekels of silver, and her son having restored them to\nher, she dedicated or vowed them unto the Lord, and made images with\nthem, and she built a small chapel and hired a Levite to officiate\ntherein for ten shekels of silver by the year, and a suit of apparel\nand his victuals. Then said Micah: \u201cNow know I that the Lord will do\nme good, seeing that I have a Levite to be my priest.\u201d[48]\n\nIn a short time after, six hundred men of the tribe of Dan, who\nwere in search of some town which they might seize upon as an\ninheritance to dwell in, came to the house of Micah, where they\nfound the Levite officiating; and having no priest of their own with\nthem, and thinking that on that account God would not prosper their\nundertaking, they seized upon the carved image, the ephod, and the\nteraphim belonging to Micah, and also the Levite, whom they took\nwith them in spite of all the remonstrances of the latter, and the\noutcries of Micah and his mother. After this, full of assurance of\nsuccess, they went and fell upon the city of Laish, and smote all\nthe inhabitants with the edge of the sword, and burnt the city to\nthe ground, as was their usual custom; they then built them another\ncity, and called its name Dan,[49] in remembrance of their victory;\nand they set up Micah\u2019s graven image; and what is more remarkable,\nJonathan, the grandson of Moses, was a priest of the temple, wherein\nthe God of Israel and the idol of Micah were both worshipped at the\nsame time.[50]\n\nAfter the death of Gideon, the Israelites worshipped Baal-Perith\nfor upwards of twenty years, and abandoned the worship of the true\nGod, without any punishment being inflicted upon them for it, either\nby their chiefs, their judges, or their priests. This, I must\nconfess, was a very heinous crime; but then, if even this idolatry\nwas tolerated, how great must have been the differences of the true\nworship?\n\nThere are some persons, who, in support of non-toleration, bring us\nthe authority of God Himself; who, having suffered His ark to fall\ninto the hands of the Philistines in the day of battle, punished\nthem only by afflicting them with an inward distemper, resembling\nthe h\u00e6morrhoids or piles, by breaking in pieces the statue of their\ngod Dagon, and by sending a number of rats to devour the fruits of\ntheir lands. But when the Philistines, in order to appease his wrath,\nsent back the ark drawn by two cows that gave milk to their calves,\nand made an offering to the Lord of five golden rats, and the like\nnumber of golden h\u00e6morrhoids, the Lord smote seventy of the Elders of\nIsrael, and fifty thousand of the people, for having looked upon the\nark. To this it may be answered, that the judgment of God was not, on\nthis occasion, directed against any particular belief, any difference\nin worship, or idolatry.\n\nIf God had meant to punish idolatry, He would have destroyed all the\nPhilistines who had attempted to seize upon His ark, and who were\nworshippers of the idol Dagon; whereas, we find Him smiting with\ndeath fifty thousand and seventy of His own people, for having looked\nupon His ark, which they ought not to have looked upon. So much did\nthe laws and manners of those times and the Jewish dispensation\ndiffer from everything that we know, and so inscrutable are the ways\nof God to us! \u201cThe rigorous punishment,\u201d says the learned Doctor\nCalmet, \u201cinflicted on such a multitude of persons on this occasion,\nwill appear excessive only to those who do not comprehend how greatly\nGod would have Himself feared and respected among His chosen people,\nand who judge of the ways and designs of Providence only by the weak\nlights of their own reason.\u201d\n\nHere then God punished the Israelites, not for any strange worship,\nbut for a profanation of His own; an indiscreet curiosity, a\ndisobedience of His precepts, and perhaps an inward rebellious\nspirit. It is true, that such punishments appertain alone to the God\nof the Hebrews, and we cannot too often repeat, that those times and\nmanners were altogether different from ours.\n\nAgain, we find, some ages after, when the idolatrous Naaman asked of\nElijah if he might be allowed to follow his king up to the temple of\nRimmon, and bow down himself there with him; this very Elijah,[51]\nwho had before caused the little children to be devoured by bears\nonly for mocking him, answered this idolater, \u201cGo in peace.\u201d\n\nBut this is not all; we find the Lord commanding Jeremiah to make\nhim bonds and yokes, saying: \u201cPut them upon thy neck,[52] and send\nthem to the king of Edom, and to the king of Moab, and to the king of\nthe Ammonites, and to the king of Tyrus, and to the king of Zidon,\u201d\nand he did so, bidding the messenger say to them in the name of the\nLord: \u201cI have given all your lands into the hand of Nebuchadnezzar,\nking of Babylon, my servant.\u201d[53] Here then we have God declaring an\nidolatrous prince his servant and favorite.\n\nThe same prophet having been cast into the dungeon by order of the\nJewish king Zedekiah, and afterwards released by him, advises him in\nthe name of God to submit himself to the king of Babylon, saying:\n\u201cIf thou wilt assuredly go forth unto the king of Babylon\u2019s princes,\nthy soul shall live.\u201d God therefore takes part with an idolatrous\nking, and delivers into his hands His holy ark, the looking upon\nwhich only had cost the lives of fifty thousand and seventy Jews;\nand not only so, but also delivers up to him the Holy of Holies,\ntogether with the rest of the temple, the building of which had cost\na hundred and eight thousand talents of gold, one million seventeen\nthousand talents of silver, and ten thousand drachmas of gold, that\nhad been left by David and his great officers for building the house\nof the Lord; which, exclusive of the sums expended for that purpose\nby King Solomon, amounts to the sum of nineteen milliards, sixty-two\nmillions, or thereabouts, of the present currency. Never, surely,\nwas idolatry so nobly rewarded. I am sensible that this account\nis exaggerated, and that it seems to be an error of the copyist.\nBut if we reduce the sum to one half, to a fourth, or even to an\neighth part, it will still be amazing. But Herodotus\u2019s account of\nthe treasures which he himself saw in the temple of Ephesus is not\nless surprising. In fine, all the riches of the earth are as nothing\nin the sight of God; and the title of _my servant_, with which he\ndignified Nebuchadnezzar, is the true and invaluable treasure.\n\nNor does God show less favor to Kir, or Koresh whom we call Cyrus,\nand whom He calls His _Christ_, His _anointed_, though he never\nwas anointed according to the general acceptation of that word,\nand was moreover a follower of the religion of Zoroaster, and a\nusurper in the opinion of the rest of mankind; yet him He calls His\n_shepherd_;[54] and we have not in the whole sacred writings so great\nan instance of divine predilection.\n\nWe are told by the prophet Malachi, that, \u201cfrom the rising of the\nsun even unto the going down of the same, the name of God shall be\ngreat among the Gentiles; and in every place a pure offering shall be\noffered unto his name.\u201d[55] God takes as much care of the idolatrous\nNinevites as of His chosen Jews. Melchizedek, though no Jew, was\nthe high-priest of the living God. Balaam, though an idolater, was\nHis prophet. The Holy Scripture then teaches us, that God not only\ntolerated every other religion, but also extended His fatherly care\nto them all. And shall we, after this, dare to be persecutors?\n\n\n\nThus, then, under Moses, the Judges, and the Kings, we find\nnumberless instances of toleration. Moreover, we are told by Moses,\nthat \u201cGod will visit the sins of the fathers upon the children,\nunto the third and fourth generation.\u201d This threat was necessary to\na people to whom God had not revealed the immortality of the soul,\nand the rewards and punishment of a future state. These truths are\nnot to be found in any part of the decalogue, nor in the Levitic or\nDeuteronomic law. They were the tenets of the Persians, Babylonians,\nEgyptians, Greeks, and Cretans, but made no part of the Jewish\nreligion. Moses does not say, \u201cHonor thy father and thy mother,\nthat thou mayest inherit _eternal_ life,\u201d but \u201cthat thy days may be\nlong in the land which the Lord thy God giveth thee\u201d; that is, in\nthis life; and the punishments with which he threatens them regard\nonly the present mortal state; such as being smitten with the scab\nand with the itch, with blasting and with mildew; that they shall\nbetroth a wife, and another man shall lie with her; that they shall\nbuild houses, and others shall dwell therein; that they shall plant\nvineyards, and shall not gather the grapes thereof; that they shall\neat the fruit of their own bodies, the flesh of their sons and of\ntheir daughters, and be obliged to bow down before the stranger\nthat is within their gates;[56] but he never tells them that their\nsouls are immortal, and shall taste of felicity or punishment after\ndeath. God, who conducted His people Himself, punished or rewarded\nthem immediately according to their good or evil deeds. Everything\nrelating to them was temporal, and this the learned Bishop Warburton\nbrings as a proof of the divine origin of the Jewish law;[57]\n\u201cinasmuch,\u201d says he, \u201cas God being their King, and exercising\njustice immediately upon them, according to their transgression or\nobedience, found it not necessary to reveal to them a doctrine which\nHe reserved for after-times, when He should no longer so directly\ngovern His people.\u201d Those who through ignorance pretend that Moses\ntaught the immortality of the soul, deprive the New Testament of\none of its principal advantages over the Old. It is certain that\nthe law of Moses taught only temporal punishments, extending to the\nfourth generation; and yet, notwithstanding the positive declaration\nof God delivered in this law, Ezekiel preached the very contrary to\nthe Jews, telling them, \u201cThe son shall not bear the iniquities of\nthe father;\u201d[58][59] and in another place he goes so far as to make\nGod say that \u201cHe had given them statutes that were not good, and\njudgments whereby they should not live.\u201d[60]\n\nNotwithstanding these contradictions, the book of Ezekiel was not\nthe less admitted into the number of those inspired writers: It is\ntrue, that according to St. Jerome, the synagogue did not permit the\nreading of it till after thirteen years of age; but that was for fear\ntheir youth should make a bad use of the too lively description, in\nthe sixteenth and twenty-third chapters, of the whoredoms of Aholah\nand Aholibah.\n\nBut when the immortality of the soul came to be a received\ndoctrine,[61] which was probably about the beginning of the\nBabylonish captivity, the sect of Sadducees still continued to\nbelieve that there were no rewards or punishments after death, and\nthat the faculties of the soul perished with us in like manner\nas those of the body. They also denied the existence of angels.\nIn a word, they differed much more from the other Jews than the\nProtestants do from the Catholics; nevertheless, they lived in\npeaceable communion with their brethren; and some of their sect were\nadmitted to the high-priesthood.\n\nThe Pharisees held fatality or predestination,[62] and believed in\nthe Metempsychosis;[63] the Essenians thought that the souls of\nthe just went into some happy islands,[64] and those of the wicked\ninto a kind of Tartarus, or hell. They offered no sacrifices, and\nassembled together in particular synagogues of their own. In a word,\nif we examine closely into the Jewish economy, we shall be surprised\nto find the most extensive toleration prevailing amidst the most\nshocking barbarities. This is indeed a contradiction, but almost all\npeople have been governed by contradictions. Happy are those whose\nmanners are mild, while their laws are bloody!\n\n\n\nLet us now see whether Christ established sanguinary laws, whether He\nenjoined non-toleration, instituted the horrors of the inquisition,\nor the butchery of an _auto da f\u00e9_.\n\nThere are, unless I am much mistaken, very few passages in the New\nTestament from which the spirit of persecution can have inferred that\ntyranny and constraint in religious matters are permitted: one is\nthe parable wherein the kingdom of heaven is likened unto a certain\nking who made a marriage for his son, and sent forth his servants to\ninvite guests to the wedding, saying, \u201cTell them which were bidden,\nmy oxen and my fatlings are killed, and all things are ready; come\nunto the marriage.\u201d[65] But those who were bidden made light of the\ninvitation, one going to his farm and another to his business, and\nthe rest of them took the king\u2019s servants and slew them. Upon which\nhe sent forth his armies and destroyed those murderers and burnt up\ntheir city. After this he sent out into the highways to invite all\nthat could be found to come to the marriage; but one of the guests\nhappening to sit down to table without a wedding garment, the king\nordered him to be bound hand and foot and cast into outer darkness.\n\nBut it is clear that this allegory relates only to the kingdom of\nheaven; therefore, assuredly no man can assume a right from thence\nto fetter or imprison his neighbor who should come to dine with\nhim without being properly dressed; nor do I believe that history\nfurnishes us with any instance of a prince causing one of his\ncourtiers to be hanged upon such an occasion; and there is little\nreason to apprehend that when the emperor sent his pages to any of\nthe princes of the empire to invite them to an entertainment those\nprinces would fall upon the pages and kill them.\n\nThe invitation to the marriage feast is a type of the preaching of\nthe gospel, and the murder of the king\u2019s servants is figurative of\nthe persecution of those who preach wisdom and virtue.\n\nThe other parable is that of a private person who made a great\nsupper, to which he invited many of his friends,[66] and when he was\nready to sit down to table sent his servants to tell them that all\nthings were ready; but one excused himself by saying that he had\nbought a piece of ground and must needs go and see it, an excuse\nwhich was not admissible, as no one goes to visit their lands in the\nnight-time; another said he had bought five yoke of oxen and was\ngoing to prove them; he was as much to blame as the other, since\nno one would go to prove oxen at supper-time; the third said he\nhad married a wife and could not come; this last was certainly a\nvery good excuse. The master of the house being very angry at this\ndisappointment, told his servants to go into the streets and lanes\nof the city and bring in the poor, and the maimed, the halt and the\nblind; this being done, and finding that there was yet room, he said\nunto his servant, \u201cGo out into the highways and hedges and compel\nthem (that you find) to come in.\u201d\n\nIt is true that we are not expressly told that this parable is a type\nof the kingdom of heaven, and the words \u201ccompel them to come in\u201d have\nbeen perverted to very bad purposes; but it is very evident that\none single servant could not _forcibly_ compel every person he met\nto come and sup with his master; besides, the company of people so\ncompelled would not have made the supper very agreeable. \u201cCompel them\nto come in,\u201d therefore, means nothing more, according to commentators\nof the best reputation, than pray, desire, press them to come in;\ntherefore, what connection, for heaven\u2019s sake, can prayers and\ninvitations have with persecution?\n\nBut to take things in a literal sense, is it necessary to be maimed,\nhalt, and blind, or to be compelled by force to enter into the bosom\nof the Church? Christ says in the same parable: \u201cWhen thou makest a\ndinner or a supper, call not thy friends, nor thy brethren, nor thy\nrich kinsmen\u201d; but did any one ever infer from this that we should\nnever dine or sup with our friends or kinsmen if they happen to be\nworth money?\n\nOur Saviour, after this parable of the feast, says: \u201cIf any man come\nto me, and hate not his father and mother, his wife and children,\nhis brethren and sisters, yea, and his own life also, he cannot be\nmy disciple,\u201d etc. But is there any person living so unnatural as to\nconclude from this that he ought to hate his father and mother and\nhis nearest relations? And is it not evident to one of the meanest\ncapacity that the true interpretation of these words is: hesitate not\nbetween me and your dearest affections?\n\nThe following passage in the eighth chapter of St. Matthew is also\nquoted: \u201cWhosoever heareth not the word of God shall be like to\nan heathen, and like one who sitteth at the receipt of custom\u201d;\nbut certainly this is not saying that we ought to persecute all\nunbelievers and custom-house officers; they are frequently cursed\nindeed, but they are not delivered up to the arm of secular power.\nAnd so far from depriving the latter of any part of the prerogatives\nof citizens, they are indulged with the greatest privileges; and\nthough their profession is the only one condemned in Scripture, it\nis of all others the most protected and favored by every government.\nWhy then should we not show some indulgence to our brethren who\nare unbelievers, while we load with benefits our brethren the\ntax-gatherers?\n\nAnother passage which has been grossly abused is that in St. Matthew\nand St. Mark, where we are told that Jesus being hungry in the\nmorning, and coming to a fig tree which had no leaves\u2014for it was not\nthe time of figs\u2014Jesus cursed the tree and it immediately dried up.\n\nThis miracle has been explained in several different ways, but not\none of them appears to authorize persecution. Though a fig tree\ncould not be expected to bear fruit in the beginning of March, yet\nwe find it blasted; but is that a reason why we should blast our\nbrethren with affliction in all seasons of the year? When we meet\nwith anything in holy writing that may occasion doubts in our vain\nand inquisitive minds, we should pay it all due reverence, but let us\nnot make use of it to countenance cruelty and persecution.\n\nThe spirit of persecution which perverts everything has also strained\nin its own vindication the story of Christ driving the buyers and\nsellers out of the temple, and that of his sending a legion of\ndevils out of the body of the man possessed with an evil spirit\ninto two thousand unclean animals; but cannot any one perceive that\nthese two instances were no other than acts of justice, which God\nHimself deigned to execute for a contravention of His law? It was\na disrespect shown to the house of the Lord to change His dwelling\ninto a market for buyers and sellers. And although the Sanhedrim and\nits priests might permit this traffic for the greater convenience of\ntheir sacrifices, yet the God to whom these sacrifices were offered\nmight, doubtless, though under a human shape, overturn this profane\npractice. In the same manner might He punish those who brought into\nthe country whole troops of those animals which were prohibited by\nthe law of which He Himself deigned to be an observer. These two\nexamples, then, have not the least connection with persecution for\nreligion\u2019s sake; and the spirit of non-toleration must certainly be\nfounded upon very false principles when it everywhere seeks such idle\npretexts.\n\nChrist, in almost every other part of His gospel, both by His words\nand actions, preaches mildness, forbearance and indulgence. Witness\nthe father who receives his prodigal son, and the workman who comes\nat the last hour and yet is paid as much as the others; witness the\ncharitable Samaritan, and Christ Himself, who excuses His disciples\nfor not fasting, who pardons the woman who had sinned, and only\nrecommends fidelity for the future to the woman caught in adultery.\nHe even condescends to partake of the innocent mirth of those who\nhave met at the marriage feast in Cana, and who being already warmed\nwith wine and wanting still more, Christ is pleased to perform a\nmiracle in their favor by changing their water into wine. He is not\neven incensed against Judas, whom He knew to be about to betray Him;\nHe commands Peter never to make use of the sword, and reprimands\nthe sons of Zebedee, who, after the example of Elias, wanted to\ncall down fire from heaven to consume a town in which they had been\nrefused a lodging. In a word, He Himself died a victim to malice\nand persecution; and, if one might dare to compare God with a mortal\nand sacred things with profane, His death, humanly speaking, had a\ngreat resemblance to that of Socrates. The Greek philosopher suffered\nfor the hatred of the sophists, the priests and the heads of the\npeople; the Christian Law-giver, by that of the Scribes, Pharisees\nand priests. Socrates might have avoided death, but would not;\nChrist offered Himself a voluntary sacrifice. The Greek philosopher\nnot only pardoned his false accusers and iniquitous judges, he even\ndesired them to treat his children as they had done himself, should\nthey, like him, one day be happy enough to deserve their hatred. The\nChristian Law-giver, infinitely superior to the heathen, besought\nHis Father to forgive His enemies. If Christ seemed to fear death,\nand if the agonies He was in at its approach drew from Him sweat\nmixed with blood, which is the most violent and rare of all symptoms,\nit was because He condescended to submit to every weakness of the\nhuman frame, which He had taken upon Him; His body trembled, but His\nsoul was unshaken. By His example we may learn that true fortitude\nand greatness consist in supporting those evils at which our nature\nshrinks. It is the height of courage to meet death at the same time\nthat we fear it.\n\nSocrates accused the sophists of ignorance and convicted them of\nfalsehood; Jesus, in His godlike character, accused the Scribes and\nPharisees of being hypocrites, blind guides and fools, and a race of\nvipers and serpents.\n\nSocrates was not accused of attempting to found a new sect, nor was\nChrist charged with endeavoring to introduce a new one. We are told\nin St. Matthew that the great men and the priests and all the council\nsought false witness against Jesus to put Him to death.\n\nNow, if they were obliged to seek for false witnesses, they could\nnot charge Him with having preached openly against the law; besides,\nit was evident that He complied in every respect with the Mosaic law\nfrom His birth to His death. He was circumcised the eighth day like\nother Jewish children; He was baptized in Jordan, agreeable to a\nceremony held sacred among the Jews and among all the other people\nof the east. All impurities of the law were cleansed by baptism; it\nwas in this manner their priests were consecrated at the solemn feast\nof the expiation, every one plunged himself in the water, and all\nnew-made proselytes underwent the same ceremony.\n\nMoreover, Jesus observed all the points of the law; He feasted every\nSabbath day, and He abstained from forbidden meats; He kept all\nthe festivals, and even before His death He celebrated that of the\nPassover; He was not accused of embracing any new opinion, nor of\nobserving any strange rites. Born an Israelite, He always lived as an\nIsraelite.\n\nHe was accused, indeed, by two witnesses of having said that He\ncould destroy the Temple and build it up again in three days; a\nspeech altogether unintelligible to the carnal Jews, but which did\nnot amount to an accusation of seeking to found a new sect.\n\nWhen He was examined before the high priest, this latter said to him:\n\u201cI command you, in the name of the living God, to tell us if Thou\nart Christ, the Son of God.\u201d We are not told what the high priest\nmeant by the Son of God. This expression was sometimes made use of to\nsignify a just or upright man,[67] in the same manner as the words\nson of Belial, to signify a wicked person. The carnal Jews had no\nidea of the sacred mystery of the Son of God, God Himself coming upon\nearth.\n\nJesus answered the high priest, \u201cthou hast said; nevertheless, I say\nunto you, hereafter shall ye see the Son of man sitting on the right\nhand of the power of God, and coming in the clouds of heaven.\u201d[68]\n\nThis answer was looked upon by the whole assembly as a blasphemy.\nBut the Sanhedrim having no longer the power of life and death, they\nfalsely accused Jesus before the Roman governor of the province of\nbeing a disturber of the public peace, and one who, said they, should\nnot pay tribute to C\u00e6sar; and, moreover, called Himself King of the\nJews. It is therefore incontestably evident that he was accused of a\ncrime against the state.\n\nPilate being informed that He was a Galilean, sent Him immediately to\nHerod, the tetrarch of Galilee. This latter, thinking it impossible\nthat a person of Jesus\u2019 appearance should pretend to be the head\nof a party, or aspire to royalty, treated Him with great contempt,\nand sent Him back again to Pilate, who had the infamous weakness to\ncondemn Him to death as the only means to appease the tumult raised\nagainst himself; more especially as he had lately experienced the\nrevolt of the Jews, as we are told by Josephus. On this occasion\nPilate did not show the same generosity which the governor Festus did\nafterwards.\n\nI now desire to know whether toleration or non-toleration appears to\nbe of divine prescription? Let those who would resemble Christ be\nmartyrs and not executioners.\n\n\n CHAPTER XV.\n TESTIMONIES AGAINST PERSECUTION.\n\nIt is an impious act to deprive men of liberty in matters of\nreligion, or prevent them from making choice of a God. No God nor man\nwould be pleased with a forced service.\u2014_Apologetic_, chap. xxiv.\n\nWere violence to be used in defence of the faith, the bishops would\noppose it.\u2014_St. Hilarius_, lib. i.\n\nReligion when forced ceases to be religion; we should persuade and\nnot compel. Religion cannot be commanded.\u2014_Lactantius_, lib. iii.\n\nIt is detestable heresy to endeavor to bring over by violence,\nbodily punishments, or imprisonments, those we cannot convince by\nreasoning.\u2014_St. Athanasius_, lib. i.\n\nNothing is more contradictory to true religion than constraint.\u2014_St.\nJustin, Martyr_, lib. v.\n\nIs it for us to persecute those whom God tolerates? said St.\nAugustine, before his dispute with the Donatists had soured his\ndisposition.\n\nLet no violence be done to the Jews.\u2014_The 56th Canon of the 4th\nCouncil of Toledo._\n\nAdvise but compel not.\u2014_St. Bernard\u2019s Letters._\n\nWe do not pretend to overcome error by violence.\u2014_Speech of the\nClergy of France to Louis XIV._\n\nWe have always disapproved of rigorous measures.\u2014_Assembly of the\nClergy, August 11, 1560._\n\nWe know that faith may yield to persuasion, but it never will be\ncontrolled.\u2014_Fl\u00e9chier, Bishop of N\u00eemes, Letter, 19._\n\nWe ought to abstain even from reproachful speeches.\u2014_Bishop of\nBelley\u2019s Pastoral Letters._\n\nRemember that the diseases of the soul are not to be cured by\nrestraint and violence.\u2014_Cardinal Camus\u2019 Pastoral Instructions for\nthe Year 1688._\n\nIndulge every one with civil toleration\u2014_Archbishop F\u00e9nelon to the\nDuke of Burgundy._\n\nCompulsion in religion proves the spirit which dictates it to be an\nenemy to truth.\u2014_Dirois, a Doctor of the Sorbonne_, b. vi. chap. iv.\n\nCompulsion may make hypocrites, but never can persuade.\u2014_Tillemont\u2019s\nHist. Eccles._ tom. vi.\n\nWe have thought it conformable to equity and right reason to walk\nin the paths of the ancient church which never used violence to\nestablish or extend religion.\u2014_Remonstrance of the Parliament of\nParis to Henry II._\n\nExperience teaches us that violence is more likely to irritate than\nto cure a distemper which is seated in the mind.\u2014_De Thou\u2019s Epistle\nDedicatory to Henry IV._\n\nFaith is not inspired by the edge of the sword.\u2014_Cerisier, in the\nReigns of Henry IV. and Louis XIII._\n\nIt is a barbarous zeal which pretends to force any religion upon\nthe mind, as if persuasion could be produced by constraint.\u2014\n_Boulainvillier\u2019s State of France._\n\nIt is with religion as with love; command can do nothing, constraint\nstill less; nothing is so independent as love and belief.\u2014_Amelot de\nla Houssaye on Cardinal Ossat\u2019s Letters._\n\nIf Providence has been so kind to you as to give you a knowledge\nof the truth, receive it as an instance of His great goodness; but\nshould those who enjoy the inheritance of their father hate those who\ndo not?\u2014_Spirit of Laws_, book xxv.\n\nOne might compose an immense volume of such passages. All our\nhistories, discourses, sermons, moral treatises and catechisms of\nthe present time abound with and inculcate this holy doctrine of\nindulgence. What fatality, what false reason, then, leads us to\ncontradict by our practice the theory we are every day teaching? When\nour actions give the lie to our morals it must certainly proceed from\nour thinking it to our interest to practise the contrary of what we\nteach; but what advantage can arise from persecuting those who do not\nthink in the same manner as we do, and thereby making ourselves hated\nby them? Once more, then, let me repeat it; there is the highest\nabsurdity in persecution. It may be replied that those who found it\nto their interest to lay a restraint upon the consciences of others\nare not absurd in so doing. To such men I address the following\nchapter.\n\n\n CHAPTER XVI.\n A CONVERSATION BETWEEN\n A DYING MAN AND ONE IN\n GOOD HEALTH.\n\nAn inhabitant of a country village lying at the point of death was\nvisited by a person in good health, who came to insult him in his\nlast moments, with the following speech:\n\n\u201cWretch that thou art, think as I do this instant, sign this writing\nimmediately, confess that five propositions are to be found in a\nbook that neither thou nor I have ever read; adopt immediately the\nopinion of Lanfranc against Berengarius, and of St. Thomas against\nSt. Bonaventura; join with the Council of Nice against the Council of\nFrankfort, and explain to me out of hand how the words \u2018My Father is\ngreater than I\u2019 signify exactly \u2018I am as great as He.\u2019 Tell me also\nin what manner the Father communicates all His attributes to the Son,\nexcepting the fatherhood, or I will have thy body thrown to the fowls\nof the air, thy children deprived of their inheritance, thy wife of\nher dowry and thy family turned out to beg their bread, which shall\nbe refused them by those who are like myself.\u201d\n\nDYING MAN.\u2014I scarcely understand what you say; your threats strike\nmy ears confusedly, they trouble my mind and render my last moments\nterrifying. In the name of God have pity on me!\n\nCRUEL MAN.\u2014Pity! I can have none for thee, unless thou art exactly of\nmy opinion.\n\nDYING MAN.\u2014Alas! you must be sensible that in these, my last moments,\nmy senses are all impaired, the doors of my understanding are shut,\nmy ideas are lost in confusion and I have hardly any sentiments\nremaining. Am I then in a condition to dispute?\n\nCRUEL MAN.\u2014Well, then, if thou canst not believe as I would have\nthee, only say that you do, and that will content me.\n\nDYING MAN.\u2014How! Would you have me perjure myself to please you, when\nI am going in an instant to appear before the judgment seat of that\nGod who is the avenger of perjury?\n\nCRUEL MAN.\u2014No matter; thou wilt have the pleasure to be interred\nin holy ground, and thy wife and children will have wherewithal to\nmaintain them after thy death. Die a hypocrite; hypocrisy is a very\ngood thing; I have heard say it is the homage which vice pays to\nvirtue. A little hypocrisy, friend, can\u2019t cost you much.\n\nDYING MAN.\u2014Surely you must either not acknowledge a God, or hold Him\nvery cheap, since you require me to tell a lie with my last breath,\nwhen you yourself must soon appear in judgment before Him and answer\nfor that lie.\n\nCRUEL MAN.\u2014Insolent wretch! Dost thou say that I do not acknowledge a\nGod?\n\nDYING MAN.\u2014Pardon me, brother; I rather fear you do not know Him. The\nGod whom I adore lends me at this time an increase of strength to\ntell you with my dying words that if you believe in Him you ought to\nbehave toward me with charity. He has given me my wife and children;\ndo not you make them perish with misery. As for my body, do with it\nas seems good to you; I leave it at your disposal; but let me conjure\nyou to believe in God.\n\nCRUEL MAN.\u2014Come, come; truce with your reasoning, and do as I bid\nyou; I will have it so. I command you to do it.\n\nDYING MAN.\u2014But what advantage can you have in thus tormenting me?\n\nCRUEL MAN.\u2014What advantage? Why, if I can make you sign, it will be\nworth a good canonship to me.\n\nDYING MAN.\u2014Ah! brother; my last moment approaches; I am expiring, but\nI will pray to God to touch your heart that you may be converted.\n\nCRUEL MAN.\u2014The devil take the impertinent puppy; he has not signed\nafter all! Well, I\u2019ll e\u2019en sign for him; it is but a little forgery.\n\nThe following letter is a confirmation of the above doctrine:\n\n\n CHAPTER XVII.\n A LETTER FROM A BENEFICED PRIEST\n TO FATHER LETELLIER, THE JESUIT,\n DATED THE 6th OF MAY, 1714.\n\nReverend Father: The following is in obedience to the orders I\nreceived from your reverence to lay before you the most effectual\nmeans for delivering Jesus and His company from their enemies.\n\nI believe there may be remaining at this time in the kingdom not more\nthan five hundred thousand Huguenots; some say a million, others a\nmillion and a half; but let the number be what it will, the following\nis my advice, which, however, as in duty bound, I submit with all\nhumility to your reverence\u2019s judgment.\n\nIn the first place, then, it will be very easy to seize in one day\nall the preachers, and to hang them all at one time and in one place,\nwhich will be not only a very edifying, but also a very entertaining\nexhibition to the people.\n\nSecondly, I would have all the fathers and mothers who are heretics\nmurdered in their beds, because the killing of them in the streets\nmight occasion some little disturbance; besides, by that means,\nseveral of them might escape, which is above all to be prevented.\nThis execution is a necessary corollary of our principles; for if\nwe ought to kill a heretic, as so many of our great divines have\nincontestably proved, it is evident that we ought to kill them all\nwithout exception.\n\nThirdly, I would, the very next day, marry all the daughters to good\nCatholics, inasmuch as it would not be politic to depopulate the\nstate so much after the late war; but as for the boys of fourteen\nand fifteen years of age, who have already imbibed bad principles,\nwhich we cannot hope to root out, \u2019tis my opinion that they should\nbe all castrated to prevent the race from ever being reproduced. As\nfor the other younger lads, they may be brought up in our colleges,\nwhere they may be whipped till they have learned by heart the works\nof Sanchez and Molinos.\n\nFourthly, I think under correction, the same method ought to be taken\nwith all the Lutherans of Alsace, for I remember, in the year 1704,\nto have seen two old women of that country laugh on the day of our\ndefeat at Blenheim.\n\nFifthly, What relates to the Jansenists will perhaps appear a little\nmore difficult. I believe their numbers may amount to about six\nmillions, a little more or less; but this ought not to give any\nalarm to a person of your reverence\u2019s disposition. I reckon among\nthe Jansenists all the parliaments who have so unworthily maintained\nthe liberties of the Gallican church. I leave it to your reverence\nto weigh with your usual prudence the most effectual methods for\nreducing these turbulent spirits. The Gunpowder Plot failed of the\ndesired success through the weakness of one of the conspirators,\nwho wanted to save the life of his friend; but, as your reverence\nhas no friend, the same inconvenience is not to be apprehended. You\nmay very easily blow up all the parliaments in the kingdom with the\ncomposition called Pulvis Pyrius, invented by the monk Schwarz. By\nmy calculation it will require upon an average thirty-six barrels of\npowder for each of the parliaments; now, if we multiply thirty-six,\nthe number of barrels, by twelve, the number of parliaments, it will\nmake four hundred and thirty-two barrels, which, at a hundred crowns\nper barrel, will amount to not quite a hundred and thirty thousand\nlivres\u2014a mere trifle for the reverend father-general.\n\nThe parliaments thus disposed of, you may bestow their places upon\nyour congregationists, who are perfectly well versed in the laws of\nthe realm.\n\nSixthly, It will be a very easy matter to poison the Cardinal de\nNoailles, who is a very simple, unsuspecting man.\n\nYour reverence may take the same steps for conversion with several of\nthe refractory prelates; and their bishoprics, by a brief from the\npope, may be put into the hands of the Jesuits; thus all the bishops\nthat remain, being staunch to the good cause, and they making a\nproper choice of curates, I, with your reverence\u2019s permission, would\ngive the following advice:\n\nSeventhly and lastly, As the Jansenists are said to take the\nsacrament one time in the year at least, which is at Easter, it would\nnot be amiss to season the consecrated wafers with a little of that\ndrug which was used to do justice upon the Emperor Henry VII. Some\nnice caviller may perhaps tell me that in this operation we may run\nsome risk of poisoning the Molinists at the same time. There is some\nweight in this objection; but then it should be considered that there\nis no project without its inconveniences, nor any system but what\nthreatens destruction in some part. And if we were to be stopped by\nthese little difficulties we should never attain our end in anything;\nbesides, as here we have in view the obtaining the greatest of all\npossible advantages, we should not suffer ourselves to be shocked,\nthough it brings with it some bad consequences, especially as those\nconsequences are of little or no consideration.\n\nAnd, after all, we shall have nothing to reproach ourselves with,\nsince it is proved that the Reformed, as they call themselves, and\nthe Jansenists, have all of them their portion in hell; therefore, we\nonly put them in possession of their inheritance a little sooner.\n\nIt is as evident that heaven belongs of right to the Molinists;\ntherefore by destroying them by mistake, and without any evil\nintention, we hasten their happiness; and are in both cases the\nministers of Providence.\n\nAs to those who may be a little shocked at the number to be thus made\naway with, your reverence may remark to them that from the first\nflourishing days of the church to the year 1707\u2014that is to say, in\nabout fourteen hundred years\u2014religion has occasioned the massacre\nof upwards of fifty millions of persons; whereas by my proposal not\nabove six millions and a half will be put to death by the halter, the\ndagger, or poison.\n\nBut perhaps it may be objected that my calculation is not just, and\nthat I have committed an error against the Rule of Three; inasmuch\nas, that if in fourteen hundred years there perished fifty millions\nof souls on account of some trifling disputes in divinity, that makes\nonly thirty-five thousand seven hundred and fourteen and some little\nfraction in a year, and consequently that by my method an overplus of\nsix millions sixty-four thousand two hundred and eighty-five and some\nfractions are put to death in the current year. But, indeed, this is\na very childish quibble; nay, I\u2019ll even call it impious; for is it\nnot plain that by my method I save the lives of all the Catholics, so\nlong as the world shall last? But, in short, there would be no end of\nanswering every frivolous objection.\n\nI am, with the most profound respect, reverend father, your\nreverence\u2019s most humble, most devout, and most humane\n\n R\u2014\u2014\u2014,\n Native of Angoul\u00eame,\n Prefect of the Congregation.\n\nThis glorious scheme, however, could not be carried into execution,\nbecause it required considerable time to make the necessary\ndispositions, and that Father Letellier was banished the year\nfollowing. But as it is right to examine both sides of an argument,\nit will be proper to inquire in what cases it may be lawful to\nfollow in part the scheme of the reverend father\u2019s correspondent. It\nwould seem rather too severe to execute it in all its parts; let us\ntherefore examine in what cases we ought to break upon the wheel,\nto hang, or to make galley-slaves of those who differ from us in\nopinion. This shall be the subject of the following chapter.\n\n\n CHAPTER XVIII.\n THE ONLY CASES IN WHICH\n NON-TOLERATION MAKES\n PART OF THE HUMAN LAW.\n\nFor a government not to have a right to punish men for their errors,\nit is necessary that those errors should not be crimes; and they\nare crimes only when they disturb the public tranquillity; which\nthey do whenever they inspire enthusiasm. It is necessary therefore\nthat men should begin by laying aside enthusiasm in order to deserve\ntoleration.\n\nIf a number of young Jesuits, knowing that the church holds all\nreprobates and heretics in detestation, and that the opinion of the\nJansenists having been condemned by a bull this sect is consequently\nreprobate, thereupon go and set fire to the house of the fathers of\nthe oratory, because Quesnel, one of that body, was a Jansenist; it\nis clear that the government would be obliged to punish those Jesuits.\n\nIn like manner, if these latter have been found to teach the most\nreprehensible doctrines, and if their institution appears contrary\nto the laws of the kingdom, it becomes necessary to abolish their\nsociety, and of Jesuits to make them useful citizens; which, in fact,\nso far from being an oppression upon them, as has been pretended, is\na real good done them; for where is the great oppression of being\nobliged to wear a short coat instead of a long gown, or to be free\ninstead of being a slave? In time of peace whole regiments are broken\nwithout complaining. Why, then, should the Jesuits make such an\noutcry, when they are broken for the sake of peace?\n\nWere the Franciscans in a transport of holy zeal for the Virgin Mary,\nto go and pull down the church of the Dominicans, who hold Mary to\nhave been born in original sin, the government would then be obliged\nto treat the Franciscans much in the same manner it has done the\nJesuits.\n\nThe same argument will hold good with regard to the Lutherans and\nCalvinists; for let them say, if they please, we follow the dictates\nof our consciences; it is more profitable to obey God than man; we\nare the only true flock, and therefore ought to cut off all the\nwolves. It is evident that in this case they themselves are the\nwolves.\n\nOne of the most astonishing examples of enthusiasm was in a little\nsect in Denmark, founded on one of the best principles in the\nworld; for these people endeavored to procure the eternal happiness\nof all their brethren; but the consequences of this principle were\nvery singular. As they believed that all the young children who died\nwithout baptism were damned, and that those who had the happiness to\ndie immediately after receiving that sacrament enter into eternal\nhappiness, they went forth and murdered all the young children of\nboth sexes lately baptized, whom they could meet with. By this\naction they doubtless procured the little innocents the greatest of\nall felicity, by preserving them at once from sin, the miseries of\nthis life, and hell, and sending them certainly to heaven. But these\npeople, in the excess of their charitable zeal, did not consider that\nit is forbidden to do evil that good may come thereof; that they had\nno right over the lives of these infants; that the greatest part\nof fathers and mothers are so carnal as to desire rather to keep\ntheir children about them than to see their throats cut, though it\nwas to send them to heaven; and, lastly, that it is the duty of the\nmagistrate to punish murder, though committed with a good intent.\n\nIt would seem that the Jews had the greatest right of any persons\nto rob and murder us; for although the Old Testament abounds with\nexamples of toleration and indulgence, yet are there several\ninstances of the contrary, and some very severe laws. God did at\ntimes command his people to kill all idolaters, reserving only\nthe young women fit for the nuptial state. They look upon us as\nidolaters; and notwithstanding that we at present tolerate them, they\nmight certainly, had they the power in their hands, cut us all off,\nexcepting our young women.\n\nMoreover, they would be under an indispensable obligation to\nexterminate the whole Turkish race. This speaks for itself, for the\nTurks are at present in possession of the countries of the Hittites,\nthe Jebusites, the Amorites, the Girgashites, etc., all of whom were\nlaid under a curse, and their country, which was about five and\ntwenty leagues in extent, was given to the Jews by several successive\ncovenants; consequently they ought to resume possession of their own,\nwhich the Turks have usurped from them for upwards of a thousand\nyears. But if the Jews were to reason in this manner nowadays, it is\npretty certain we should make them no other answer than by impaling\nthem alive.\n\nThese are the only cases in which persecution appears reasonable.\n\n\n CHAPTER XIX.\n ACCOUNT OF A CONTROVERSIAL\n DISPUTE WHICH HAPPENED IN\n CHINA.\n\nIn the beginning of the reign of the great Emperor Cam-hi, a mandarin\nof the city of Canton, hearing a great noise and outcry in the house\nadjoining that he dwelt in, sent to know if they were murdering\nany one; but was told that it was only a Danish almoner, a Dutch\nchaplain, and a Jesuit disputing together; upon which he ordered them\nto be brought before him, and inquired of them the occasion of their\nquarrel?\n\nThe Jesuit, who was the first that spoke, said that it was a very\ngrievous thing to him, who was always in the right, to have to do\nwith people who were always in the wrong; that he at first began to\nreason with them with the greatest coolness; but that, at length, he\ncould not but own his patience had left him.\n\nThe mandarin then represented to all three, with all imaginable\ncandor, how necessary it was to observe decorum and good manners even\nin disputation; he told them that no one ever gave way to heat or\npassion in China, and desired to be informed of the nature of their\ndispute.\n\n\u201cMy lord,\u201d said the Jesuit, \u201cI take you for judge in this affair.\nThese two gentlemen refuse to submit to the decisions of the Council\nof Trent.\u201d\n\n\u201cI am surprised at that,\u201d replied the mandarin. Then turning towards\nthe two refractory parties: \u201cGentlemen,\u201d said he, \u201cyou ought to\nshow a deference to the opinion of a great assembly. I do not know\nwhat the Council of Trent is, but a number of persons must always\nhave opportunities of knowing better than one single man. No one\nought to imagine that he knows more than all others, and that reason\ndwells only with him; this is the doctrine of our great Confucius;\ntherefore, if you would take my advice, abide by what the Council of\nTrent has decreed.\u201d\n\nThe Dane then began to speak in his turn. \u201cYour excellence,\u201d said he,\n\u201chas delivered yourself with great wisdom and prudence; we have all\nthat respect for great assemblies that we ought; and accordingly we\nsubmit entirely to the opinions of several councils that were held at\nthe same time with that of Trent.\u201d\n\n\u201cOh! if that is the case,\u201d said the mandarin, \u201cI ask your pardon;\nyou may doubtless be in the right. So, then, it seems you and the\nDutchman are of one opinion against the Jesuit.\u201d\n\n\u201cNot in the least,\u201d answered the Dutchman; \u201cthis man here,\u201d pointing\nto the Dane, \u201centertains notions almost as extravagant as those of\nthe Jesuit, who pretends to so much mildness before you. \u2018Sblood!\nthere is no bearing this with patience.\u201d\n\n\u201cI cannot conceive what you mean,\u201d said the mandarin; \u201care you\nnot all three Christians? Are you not all three come to teach the\nChristian religion in our empire? And ought you not consequently have\nall the same tenets?\u201d\n\n\u201cYou see how it is, my lord,\u201d said the Jesuit; \u201cthese two men here\nare mortal enemies of each other; and yet both of them dispute\nagainst me; this makes it clear that they are both in the wrong, and\nthat reason is on my side.\u201d\n\n\u201cI do not think it is so very clear,\u201d replied the mandarin; \u201cfor\nit may very well happen that you are all three in the wrong. But I\nshould be glad to hear your arguments singly.\u201d\n\nThe Jesuit then made a long discourse, while the Dutchman and the\nDane at every period shrugged up their shoulders, and the mandarin\ncould not make anything of what he heard. The Dane now took the lead\nin his turn, while his two adversaries looked upon him with manifest\nsigns of contempt; and the mandarin, when he had finished, remained\nas wise as before. The Dutchman had the same success. At length\nthey began to talk all three together, and broke out into the most\nscurrilous revilings. The honest mandarin could hardly get in a word.\nAt length he dismissed them, saying: \u201cIf you expect to have your\ndoctrine tolerated here, begin by showing an example of it to one\nanother.\u201d\n\nAt leaving the house the Jesuit met with a Dominican missionary, to\nwhom he related what had passed; and told him that he had gained his\ncause; \u201cfor you may be assured,\u201d added he, \u201cthat truth will always\nprevail.\u201d The Dominican replied: \u201cHad I been there, friend, you would\nnot so easily have gained your cause; for I should have proved you to\nbe an idolater and a liar.\u201d Upon this, there arose a violent dispute\nbetween them; and the Jesuit and the friar went to fisticuffs. The\nmandarin being informed of this scandalous behavior ordered them both\nto be sent to prison. A sub-mandarin asked his excellence how long he\nwould please to have them remain in confinement. \u201cTill they are both\nagreed,\u201d said the judge. \u201cThen, my lord,\u201d answered the sub-mandarin,\n\u201cthey will remain in prison all their days.\u201d \u201cWell, then,\u201d said\nthe mandarin, \u201clet them stay till they forgive one another.\u201d \u201cThat\nthey will never do,\u201d rejoined the deputy; \u201cI know them very well.\u201d\n\u201cIndeed!\u201d said the mandarin; \u201cthen let it be till they appear so to\ndo.\u201d\n\n\n CHAPTER XX.\n WHETHER IT IS OF SERVICE\n TO INDULGE THE PEOPLE IN\n SUPERSTITION.\n\nSuch is the weakness and perversity of the human race that it is\nundoubtedly more eligible for them to be subject to every possible\nkind of superstition, provided it is not of a bloody nature, than\nto live without religion. Man has always stood in need of a curb;\nand though it was certainly very ridiculous to sacrifice to fauns,\nsatyrs, and na\u00efads, yet it was more reasonable and advantageous to\nadore even those fantastic images of the deity than to be given up to\natheism. An atheist of any capacity, and invested with power, would\nbe as dreadful a scourge to the rest of mankind as the most bloody\nenthusiast.\n\nWhen men have not true notions of the Deity, false ideas must supply\ntheir place, like as in troublesome and calamitous times we are\nobliged to trade with base money when good is not to be procured.\nThe heathens were afraid of committing crimes, lest they should be\npunished by their false gods. The Malabar dreads the anger of his\npagods. Wherever there is a fixed community, religion is necessary;\nthe laws are a curb upon open crimes, and religion upon private ones.\n\nBut when once men have embraced a pure and holy religion,\nsuperstition then becomes not only needless, but very hurtful. Those\nwhom God has been pleased to nourish with bread ought not to be fed\nupon acorns.\n\nSuperstition is to religion what astrology is to astronomy, the\nfoolish daughter of a wise mother. These two daughters, however, have\nfor a long time governed this world with uncontrollable sway.\n\nIn those dark and barbarous times amongst us, when there were hardly\ntwo feudal lords who had a New Testament in their houses, it might\nbe pardonable to present the common people with fables; I mean those\nfeudal lords, their ignorant wives, and brutish vassals. They were\nthen made to believe that St. Christopher carried the child Jesus\non his shoulders from one side of the river to the other; they were\nentertained with stories of witches and witchcraft; they readily\nbelieved that St. Genou cured the gout, and St. Claire sore eyes. The\nchildren believed in hobgoblins, and their fathers in St. Francis\u2019\ngirdle; and relics swarmed out of number.\n\nThe common people have continued to be infected with the rust of\nthese superstitions, even after religion became more enlightened. It\nis well known that when M. de Noailles, bishop of Ch\u00e2lons, ordered\nthe pretended relic of the holy navel to be taken away and thrown\ninto the fire, the whole city of Ch\u00e2lons joined in a prosecution\nagainst him; but he, who had resolution equal to his piety, soon\nbrought the people of his diocese to believe that one may adore Jesus\nChrist in spirit and in truth, without having his navel in a church.\n\nThose whom we call Jansenists were not a little instrumental in\nrooting out by degrees, from the minds of the greatest part of the\nnation, the many absurd notions which were the disgrace of our holy\nreligion. And it no longer continued to be thought sufficient to\nrepeat the prayer of thirty days to the Blessed Virgin, to obtain\nwhatever one should ask, and sin with impunity.\n\nAt length the lower kind of people began to imagine that it was not\nSt. Genevi\u00e8ve who gave rain or caused it to cease, but God Himself,\nwho disposed the elements according to His good will and pleasure.\nThe monks have been astonished to find their saints no longer perform\nmiracles; and if the writers of the life of St. Francis Xavier were\nto come again into the world they would not venture to assert that\ntheir saint raised nine people from the dead; that he was at one and\nthe same time both on the sea and on shore; or that a crab brought\nhim his crucifix, which he had dropped out of his hand into the water.\n\nIt has happened much the same with regard to excommunications. Our\nFrench historians tell us that when King Robert was excommunicated\nby Pope Gregory V. for having married the Princess Bertha, who\nwas his godmother, his domestics threw all the victuals that came\nfrom his table out of the windows, and that his queen Bertha was\ndelivered of a goose as a punishment for this incestuous alliance.\nIt is not likely that the pages of the presence to a king of France\nnowadays would throw his dinner into the streets if he should be\nexcommunicated, nor would it be very readily believed that the queen\nwas brought to bed of a bird.\n\nIf there are some few convulsionists yet to be met with in an obscure\ncorner of the town it is a kind of lousy disease that infects only\nthe dregs of the people. Reason is every day making her way into\nthe tradesman\u2019s counting house, as well as into the palaces of our\nnobility. It behooves us then to cultivate the fruits of this reason,\nmore especially as it is impossible to prevent them from sprouting\nforth. France, after having been enlightened by a Pascal, a Nicole,\nan Arnaud, a Bossuet, a Descartes, a Gassendi, a Bayle, a Fontenelle,\nand other bright geniuses like them, is no longer to be governed as\nin the times of Garasse and Menot.\n\nIf the masters of error, I mean the great masters who were so long\na time prayed to and reverenced for brutalizing the human species,\nwere at present to enjoin us to believe that the seed must rot in the\nearth before it can sprout; that this earth continues immovable on\nits basis without revolving about the sun; that the tides are not\nthe natural effect of gravitation; that the rainbow is not formed by\nthe refraction and reflection of the rays of light, etc., and were\nthey to bring certain passages of Scripture badly understood and\nworse interpreted to authenticate their ordinances, how would they\nbe looked upon by every person of common capacity? Would fools be\nthought too harsh a name to be imposed on them? But if they should\nhave recourse to compulsion and persecution to establish their\ninsolent ignorance, would not madmen and butchers be deemed a proper\nappellation?\n\nThe more that monkish superstition becomes contemptible, the more\nbishops are respected and the clergy in general esteemed. They do\ngood in their professions, whereas the monkish superstition of\nforeign climates occasioned a great deal of mischief. But of all\nsuperstitions, that of hating our neighbor on account of his opinion\nis surely the most dangerous! And will it not be granted me that\nthere would be more sense and reason in adoring the holy navel, the\nholy prepuce, and the milk and the robe of the Blessed Virgin, than\nto detest and persecute our brother?\n\n\n CHAPTER XXI.\n VIRTUE IS BETTER\n THAN LEARNING.\n\nThe fewer dogmas, the fewer disputes; and the fewer disputes, the\nfewer calamities: if this is not true I am much mistaken.\n\nReligion is instituted to make us happy in this life and the next.\nBut what is required to make us happy in the life to come? To be\njust. And in this? To be merciful and forbearing.\n\nIt would be the height of madness to pretend to bring all mankind to\nthink exactly in the same manner in regard to metaphysics. We might,\nwith much greater ease, subject the whole universe by force of arms\nthan subject the minds of all the inhabitants of one single village.\n\nBut Euclid found no difficulty in persuading every one of the truths\nof geometry. And why? Because there is not one of them which is not a\nself-evident corollary on this simple axiom: \u201cTwo and two make four.\u201d\nBut is it not altogether the same with relation to the complicated\nmaxims in metaphysics and divinity.\n\nEusebius and Socrates tell us that when Bishop Alexander and Arius\nthe priest began first to dispute in what manner the Logos or word\nproceeded from the Father, the Emperor Constantine wrote to them in\nthe following terms: \u201cYou are great fools to dispute about things\nyou do not understand.\u201d\n\nIf the two contending parties had been wise enough to acknowledge\nthat the emperor was in the right Christendom would not have been\ndrenched in blood for upwards of three centuries.\n\nAnd, indeed, what can be more ridiculous, or rather detestable, than\nto address mankind in this manner: \u201cMy friends, it is not sufficient\nthat you are faithful subjects, dutiful children, tender parents,\nand upright neighbors; that you live in the continual practice of\nvirtue; that you are grateful, benevolent, and generous, and worship\nthe Saviour of the world in peace; it is furthermore required of you\nthat you should know how a thing may be begotten from all eternity,\nwithout being made from all eternity; and if you cannot distinguish\nthe homoousian in the hypostasis, we declare to you that you are\ndamned to all eternity; and in the meantime we shall begin by cutting\nyour throats\u201d?\n\nIf such a decision as this had been presented to Archimedes,\nPosidonius, Varro, Cato, or Cicero, what answer do you think they\nwould have given to it?\n\nConstantine, however, did not persevere in silencing the two parties;\nhe might easily have summoned the chiefs of the disputes before\nhim, and have demanded of them by what authority they disturbed the\npeace of mankind. \u201cAre you,\u201d he might have said, \u201cpossessed of the\ngenealogy of the heavenly family? What is it to you whether the\nSon was made or begotten, provided that you are faithful to Him;\nthat you preach a sound doctrine, and practise that doctrine if you\ncan? I have committed many faults in my lifetime, and so have you;\nI have been ambitious, so have you; it has cost me many falsehoods\nand cruelties to attain to the empire; I have murdered my nearest\nrelative that stood in my way; but I now repent, and am willing to\nmake atonement for my crime by restoring peace to the Roman Empire;\ndo not you prevent me from doing the only good action which can\npossibly make my former cruel ones forgotten; but rather assist me to\nend my days in peace.\u201d Perhaps Constantine might not, by this speech,\nhave prevailed over the minds of the disputants, and perhaps he might\nrather be pleased with presiding in a council in a long crimson robe,\nand his forehead glittering with jewels.\n\nThis, however, opened a passage to all those dreadful calamities\nwhich overran the West from Asia. Out of every contested verse there\nissued a fury armed with a quibble and a poniard, who inspired\nmankind at once with folly and cruelty. The Huns, the Heruli,\nthe Goths, and Vandals, who came afterwards, did infinitely less\nmischief; and the greatest they did was that of afterwards engaging\nin the same fatal disputes.\n\n\n CHAPTER XXII.\n OF UNIVERSAL TOLERATION.\n\nIt does not require any great art or studied elocution to prove that\nChristians ought to tolerate one another. Nay, I shall go still\nfarther and say that we ought to look upon all men as our brethren.\nHow! call a Turk, a Jew, and a Siamese, my brother? Yes, doubtless;\nfor are we not all children of the same parent, and the creatures of\nthe same Creator?\n\nBut these people hold us in contempt, and call us idolaters! Well,\nthen, I should tell them that they were to blame. And I fancy that I\ncould stagger the headstrong pride of an imaum, or a talapoin, were I\nto address them in the following manner:\n\n\u201cThis little globe, which is no more than a point, rolls, together\nwith many other globes, in that immensity of space in which we are\nall alike confounded. Man, who is an animal, about five feet high,\nis certainly a very inconsiderable part of the creation; but one\nof those hardly visible beings says to others of the same kind\ninhabiting another spot of the globe: Hearken to me, for the God of\nall these worlds has enlightened me. There are about nine hundred\nmillions of us little insects who inhabit the earth, but my ant-hill\nis alone cherished by God, who holds all the rest in horror and\ndetestation; those who live with me upon my spot will alone be happy,\nand all the rest eternally wretched.\u201d\n\nThey would here stop me short and ask, \u201cWhat madman could have made\nso ridiculous a speech?\u201d I should then be obliged to answer them, \u201cIt\nis yourselves.\u201d After which I should endeavor to pacify them, but\nperhaps that would not be very easy.\n\nI might next address myself to the Christians and venture to say,\nfor example, to a Dominican, one of the judges of the inquisition:\n\u201cBrother, you know that every province in Italy has a jargon of\nits own and that they do not speak in Venice and Bergamo as they\ndo in Florence. The Academy della Crusca has fixed the standard of\nthe Italian language; its dictionary is an unerring rule, and Buon\nMatei\u2019s grammar is an infallible guide, from neither of which we\nought to depart; but do you think that the president of the academy,\nor in his absence Buon Matei, could in conscience order the tongues\nof all the Venetians and Bergamese, who persisted in their own\ncountry dialect, to be cut out?\u201d\n\nThe inquisitor would, perhaps, make me this reply: \u201cThere is a very\nwide difference; here the salvation of your soul is concerned; and\nit is entirely for your good that the directory of the inquisition\nordains that you shall be seized, upon the deposition of a single\nperson, though of the most infamous character; that you shall have no\nperson to plead for you, nor even be acquainted with the name of your\naccuser; that the inquisitor shall promise you favor, and afterwards\ncondemn you; that he shall make you undergo five different kinds of\ntorture, and that at length you shall be either whipped, sent to the\ngalleys, or burned at the stake;[69] Father Ivonet, and the doctors,\nChucalon, Zanchinus, Campegius, Royas, Telinus, Gomarus, Diabarus,\nand Gemelinus are exactly of this opinion, consequently this pious\npractice will not admit of contradiction.\u201d\n\nTo all which I should take the liberty of making the following reply:\n\u201cDear brother, you may perhaps be in the right, and I am perfectly\nwell convinced of the great benefit you intend me; but may I not be\nsaved without all this?\u201d\n\nIt is true that these horrible absurdities do not every day deform\nthe face of the earth; but they have been very frequent, and one\nmight easily collect instances enough to make a volume much larger\nthan that of the Holy Gospels, which condemn such practices. It is\nnot only very cruel to persecute in this short life those who do not\nthink in the same manner as we do, but I very much doubt if there\nis not an impious boldness in pronouncing them eternally damned. In\nmy opinion, it little befits such insects of a summer\u2019s day as we\nare thus to anticipate the decrees of Providence. I am very far from\nopposing that maxim of the Church, that \u201cout of her pale there is no\nsalvation\u201d; on the contrary, I respect that and every other part of\nher doctrine; but, after all, can we be supposed to be intimately\nacquainted with the ways of God, or to fathom the whole depth of His\nmercy? Is it not permitted us to hope in Him, as well as to fear\nHim? Is it not sufficient if we are faithful sons of the Church,\nwithout every individual presuming to wrest the power out of the hand\nof God, and determine, before Him, the future destiny of our fellow\ncreatures?\n\nWhen we wear mourning for a king of England, Denmark, Sweden, or\nPrussia, do we say that we are in mourning for a damned soul that is\nburning in hell? There are about forty millions of inhabitants in\nEurope who are not members of the Church of Rome; should we say to\nevery one of them, \u201cSir, as I look upon you to be infallibly damned,\nI shall neither eat, drink, converse, nor have any connections with\nyou?\u201d\n\nIs there an ambassador of France who, when he is presented to the\ngrand seignior for an audience, will seriously say to himself,\nhis sublime highness will infallibly burn to all eternity for\nhaving submitted to be circumcised? If he really thought that the\ngrand seignior was a mortal enemy to God, and the object of divine\nvengeance, could he converse with such a person; nay, indeed, ought\nhe to be sent to him? But how could we carry on any commerce, or\nperform any of the civil duties of society, if we were convinced that\nwe were conversing with persons destined to eternal damnation?\n\nO ye different worshippers of a God of mercy! if ye have cruel\nhearts, if, while you adore that Deity who has placed the whole of\nHis law in these few words, \u201cLove God and your neighbor,\u201d you have\nloaded that pure and holy law with sophistical and unintelligible\ndisputes, if you have lighted the flames of discord sometimes for a\nnew word, and at others for a single letter only; if you have annexed\neternal punishment to the omission of some few words, or of certain\nceremonies which other people cannot comprehend, I must say to you\nwith tears of compassion for mankind: \u201cTransport yourselves with me\nto that great instant in which all men are to receive judgment from\nthe hand of God, who will then do unto every one according to their\nworks, and with me behold all the dead of past ages appearing in His\npresence. Are you very sure that our heavenly Father and Creator\nwill say to the wise and virtuous Confucius, to the great legislator\nSolon, to Pythagoras, Zaleucus, Socrates, Plato, the divine\nAntoninus, the good Trajan, to Titus, the delight of human kind,\nand to many others who have been the models of human kind: \u2018Depart\nfrom me, wretches! into torments that know neither alleviation nor\nend; but are, like Himself, everlasting. But you, my well-beloved\nservants, John Ch\u00e2tel, Ravaillac, Cartouche, Damiens, etc., who have\ndied according to the rules prescribed by the Church, enter into the\njoy of your Lord, and sit forever at my right hand in majesty and\nglory.\u2019\u201d\n\nMethinks I see you start with horror at these words; however, as they\nhave escaped me, let them pass; I shall say nothing more to you.\n\n\n CHAPTER XXIII.\n AN ADDRESS TO THE DEITY.\n\nNo longer then do I address myself to men, but to Thee, God of all\nbeings, of all worlds, and of all ages; if it may be permitted weak\ncreatures lost in immensity and imperceptible to the rest of the\nuniverse, to presume to petition Thee for aught, who hast given\nplenty of all things, and whose decrees are immutable as eternal.\nDeign to look with an eye of pity on the errors annexed to our\nnatures! let not these errors prove the sources of misery to us! Thou\nhast not given us hearts to hate, nor hands to kill one another;\ngrant then that we may mutually aid and assist each other to support\nthe burden of this painful and transitory life! May the trifling\ndifferences in the garments that cover our frail bodies, in the\nmode of expressing our insignificant thoughts, in our ridiculous\ncustoms and our imperfect laws, in our idle opinions, and in our\nseveral conditions and situations, that appear so disproportionate\nin our eyes, and all are equal in Thine; in a word, may the slight\nvariations that are found amongst the atoms called men not be made\nuse of by us as signals of mutual hatred and persecution! May those\nwho worship Thee by the light of tapers at noonday bear charitably\nwith those who content themselves with the light of that glorious\nplanet Thou hast placed in the midst of the heavens! May those who\ndress themselves in a robe of white linen to teach their hearers that\nThou art to be loved and feared, not detest or revile those who teach\nthe same doctrine in long cloaks of black wool! May it be accounted\nthe same to adore Thee in a dialect formed from an ancient or a\nmodern language! May those who, clothed in vestments of crimson or\nviolet color, rule over a little parcel of that heap of dirt called\nthe world, and are possessed of a few round fragments of a certain\nmetal, enjoy without pride or insolence what they call grandeur and\nriches, and may others look on them without envy; for Thou knowest,\nO God, that there is nothing in all these vanities proper to inspire\nenvy or pride.\n\nMay all men remember that they are brethren! May they alike abhor\nthat tyranny which seeks to subject the freedom of the will, as they\ndo the rapine which tears from the arms of industry the fruits of its\npeaceful labors! And if the scourge of war is not to be avoided, let\nus not mutually hate and destroy each other in the midst of peace;\nbut rather make use of the few moments of our existence to join in\npraising, in a thousand different languages, from one extremity of\nthe world to the other, Thy goodness, O all-merciful Creator, to whom\nwe are indebted for that existence!\n\n\n CHAPTER XXIV.\n POSTSCRIPT.\n\nWhile I was employed in writing this treatise, purely with a desire\nto make mankind more benevolent and charitable, another author was\nusing his pen to the very contrary purpose; for every one has his\nparticular way of thinking. This writer has published a small code\nof persecution under the title of \u201cThe Harmony of Religion and\nHumanity\u201d; but this last word seems to be an error of the press, and\nshould be read \u201cInhumanity.\u201d\n\nThe author of this holy libel takes St. Augustine for his example\nand authority, who, after having preached charity and forbearance,\nafterwards taught the doctrine of persecution, because he then had\nthe upper hand and was naturally of a changeable disposition. He also\nquotes M. Bossuet, the bishop of Meaux, who persecuted the famous\nF\u00e9nelon, archbishop of Cambray, whom he accused of having said in\nprint that God was well worthy to be loved for His own sake.\n\nI will readily grant that Bossuet was a very eloquent writer, and it\nmust also be confessed that the bishop of Hippo[70] is frequently\ninconsistent, and in general more dry and barren than the rest of the\nAfrican writers; and I must take the liberty of addressing them both\nin the words of Armande, in Moli\u00e8re\u2019s \u201cLearned Ladies\u201d: \u201cIf we should\nimitate any person, it certainly should be in the most pleasing part\nof their character.\u201d I should say to the bishop of Hippo: \u201cMy lord,\nas you have had two opinions, your lordship will be kind enough to\nsuffer me to abide by your first, since I really think it the best.\u201d\n\nTo the bishop of Meaux I shall say: \u201cMy lord, you are certainly a\nvery great man, and, in my opinion, have to the full as much learning\nas St. Augustine, and are far superior to him in eloquence; but\nthen, my lord, why did you so distress your brother prelate, who had\nas much eloquence as yourself, though in another kind, and whose\ndisposition was more amiable than yours.\u201d\n\nThe author of this \u201cTreatise on Inhumanity\u201d\u2014for so I shall call\nit\u2014is neither a Bossuet nor an Augustine, but seems admirably well\nqualified for an inquisitor; I wish he were at the head of that noble\ntribunal in Goa. Besides, he is a politician, and parades it in his\nbook with several great maxims of state. \u201cIf you have to deal with\nany considerable number of heretics,\u201d says he, \u201cit will be necessary\nto use gentle methods, and try to bring them over by persuasion; but\nif they are only a few in number, then make free use of the gibbet\nand the galleys; you will find the advantage of it.\u201d This is the good\nprelate\u2019s own advice in the 89th and 90th pages of his work.\n\nHeaven be praised, I am an orthodox Catholic, and therefore am in no\ndanger of what the Huguenots call martyrdom; but if ever this bishop\nshould come to be prime minister, as he seems to flatter himself in\nhis libels, I give him my promise that I will set out for England the\nvery day his commission is signed.\n\nIn the meantime, we ought to be thankful to Providence that those\nof his principles are always wretched reasoners. This writer has\nnot scrupled to quote Bayle among the advocates for non-toleration,\nwhich is being equally sensible and honest; for, because Bayle agrees\nthat it is necessary to punish incendiaries and rogues, our bishop\ndirectly concludes that we ought to persecute with fire and sword\nevery honest and peaceable person. See page 98.\n\nAlmost the whole of his book is no other than a copy of the apology\nfor St. Bartholomew\u2019s day. It is the apologist himself or his echo.\nBut be this matter as it will, it is devoutly to be wished that\nneither the master nor the pupil may ever be at the head of an\nadministration.\n\nBut if ever such a thing should come to pass, let me beg leave to\npresent them beforehand with the following hint in regard to a\npassage in the ninety-third page of the bishop\u2019s holy libel:\n\n\u201cIs the welfare of the whole nation to be sacrificed to the ease of\nonly the twentieth part?\u201d\n\nLet us suppose then for once that there are twenty Roman Catholics\nin France to one Huguenot, I am by no means for the Huguenots eating\nthese twenty Catholics; but, at the same time, is there any reason\nwhy the twenty Catholics should eat the Huguenot? Besides, why should\nwe hinder this latter from marrying? Are there not many bishops,\nabbots and monks that have estates in Dauphiny, Gevaudan, Agde and\nCarcassonne? And have not most of these farmers to manage those\nestates who do not believe in the doctrine of transubstantiation?\nIs it not the interest of these bishops and others that the farmers\nshould have numerous families? And should one be permitted to have\nchildren that takes the sacrament in both kinds? Surely there is\nneither justice nor common honesty in this!\n\n\u201cThe revocation of the Edict of Nantes,\u201d says my author, \u201chas not\nbeen productive of so great inconveniences as has been generally\nalleged.\u201d\n\nI must own if any have added to the number of bad effects that\nact produced, they must have greatly exaggerated; but then it is\nthe common fault of all historians to exaggerate, as it is of all\ncontroversial writers to disguise the greatest part of those evils\nwith which they are reproachable. But for once let us pin our\nfaith neither upon the doctors of the Sorbonne nor the preachers\nof Amsterdam. Let us take for judges in this matter those who have\nhad the best opportunities of being acquainted with what they wrote\nabout; and in the first place I shall cite the Count d\u2019Avaux,\nambassador from France to the States-General during the years 1685,\n1686, 1687, and 1688.\n\nIn the hundred and eighty-first page of the fifth volume of his\nworks he says that one man only offered to discover upwards of\ntwenty millions of livres that the persecuted Huguenots had found\nmeans to send out of France. Louis XIV., in answer to this, writes\nto M. d\u2019Avaux: \u201cThe accounts which I daily receive of the prodigious\nnumbers of those who are converted convince me that in a short time\nthe most obstinate will follow the example of the others.\u201d\n\nThis letter of the king\u2019s plainly shows that he was firmly persuaded\nof the greatness of his power. He was accustomed to hear said to him\nevery morning: \u201cSire, you are the greatest monarch upon earth; you\nhave but to declare your opinion and the whole world will be proud\nto follow it.\u201d Pelisson, who had accumulated a prodigious fortune\nin the place of head clerk of the treasury, who had been three\nyears confined in the Bastille as an accomplice with Fouquet, who,\nchanging his religion, was from a Calvinist made a Roman, a deacon\nand a beneficed priest, who composed hymns for the mass and verses to\nChloe, and who had got the post of comptroller and converter in chief\nof the heretics; this very Pelisson, I say, used to produce every\nmorning a long list of pretended abjurations purchased at the rate\nof seven or eight crowns apiece, and made his prince believe that he\ncould, whenever he pleased, convert the whole Mahometan empire at the\nsame price. In short, every one was in league to impose upon him;\nhow then was it possible for him to avoid being deceived?\n\nThis very M. d\u2019Avaux also acquaints the court that one Vincent kept\nupwards of five hundred workmen employed in the neighborhood of\nAngoul\u00eame, and that it would be of great prejudice to the nation\nshould they quit the kingdom. Vol. v., page 194.\n\nThe count likewise mentions two regiments at that time actually being\nraised by French refugee officers for the service of the prince of\nOrange; he observes that the entire crews of three French ships of\nwar had deserted and entered into the same service, and that besides\nthe two regiments above mentioned, the prince was forming a company\nof cadet refugees, who were to be commanded by two refugee captains.\nPage 240. The same ambassador in another letter to M. de Seignelay,\ndated the 9th of May, 1686, says that he can no longer conceal the\nuneasiness it gives him to see the manufactures of France transported\ninto Holland, where they will be established, never more to return.\n\nAdd to these incontestable evidences the testimonies of the several\nintendants of the kingdom in 1698, and then let any one judge whether\nthe revocation of the Edict of Nantes has not done more harm than\ngood, notwithstanding the opinion of the worthy author of the\n\u201cHarmony of Religion and Inhumanity.\u201d\n\nA Marshal of France well known for his superior abilities some years\nago made use of the following expression: \u201cI know not whether the\npractice of dragooning may ever have been necessary, but I am sure it\nis very necessary to lay it aside.\u201d\n\nAnd here I must confess that I was apprehensive. I had gone rather\ntoo far in publishing the letter from a priest to Father Letellier,\nin which the use of gunpowder is so humanely proposed. I said to\nmyself, people will not believe me; they will certainly think this\nletter is a forged piece; but luckily my scruples were entirely eased\nwhen in perusing the \u201cHarmony of Religion and Inhumanity,\u201d I came to\nthe following Christian and charitable passage:\n\n\u201cThe entire extirpation of the Protestants in France would not weaken\nthat kingdom more than a plentiful bleeding would a patient of a\nsound constitution.\u201d Page 149.\n\nHere this pious minister of Christ, who, but a few pages before,\nsays that the Protestants make about a twentieth part of the nation,\nis for shedding the blood of that twentieth part, and advises the\noperation with as much unconcern as he would the taking away two or\nthree ounces from the arm of a plethoric person! Heaven preserve us\nand him from the other three-twentieths!\n\nNow, if this worthy prelate is for destroying the twentieth part\nof the nation at one stroke, might not Father Letellier\u2019s friend\nand correspondent as well have proposed the blowing up, stabbing or\npoisoning the one-third? Hence then it appears very probable that\nsuch a letter was really written to Letellier.\n\nOur pious author concludes upon the whole that persecution is an\nexcellent thing; \u201cfor,\u201d says he, \u201cwe do not find it absolutely\ncondemned by our Saviour.\u201d Neither has our Saviour expressly\ncondemned those who may set fire to the four corners of Paris; but is\nthat a reason for canonizing all incendiaries?\n\nIn this manner, while the gentle voice of Nature is everywhere\npleading the cause of charity and benevolence, Enthusiasm, her avowed\nenemy, is continually howling against it; and while Peace opens her\ncalm bosom to all mankind, Persecution is busied in forging weapons\nfor their destruction. Let it be your care, then, O ye princely\narbiters, who have restored peace to the world, to pass sentence\nbetween the spirit of mutual love and harmony and that of discord and\nbloodshed.\n\n\n CHAPTER XXV.\n SEQUEL AND CONCLUSION.\n\n[Illustration: WIDOW CALAS PLEADING FOR A REVOCATION OF THE DECREE OF\nTHE PARLIAMENT OF TOULOUSE]\n\nOn the 7th of March, 1763, a council of state being held at\nVersailles, at which all the great ministers assisted and the\nchancellor sat as president, M. de Crosne, one of the masters of\nrequests, made a report of the affair of the Calas family with all\nthe impartiality of a judge, and the precision of one perfectly\nwell acquainted with the case, and with the plain truth and inspired\neloquence of an orator and a statesman, which is alone suitable to\nsuch an assembly. The gallery was filled with a prodigious number\nof persons of all ranks, who impatiently waited the decision of\nthe council. In a short time a deputation was sent to the king to\nacquaint him that the council had come to a unanimous resolution:\nthat the parliament of Toulouse should transmit to them the whole\naccount of its proceedings, together with the reasons on which it had\nframed the sentence condemning John Calas to be broken on the wheel;\nwhen his majesty was pleased to concur in the decree of the council.\n\nJustice and humanity then still continue to reside amongst mankind!\nand principally in the council of a king beloved, and deserving so\nto be; who, with his ministers, his chancellor and all the members\nof his council, have not disdained to employ their time in weighing\nall the circumstances relating to the sufferings of a private family\nwith as much attention as if it had been the most interesting affair\nof war or peace; whilst the judges have shown themselves inspired\nby a love of equity and a tender regard to the interests of their\nfellow-subjects. All praise be given therefore to that Merciful\nBeing, the only giver of integrity and every other virtue.\n\nAnd here we take occasion to declare that we never had the least\nacquaintance with the unfortunate man who was condemned on the most\nfrivolous evidence by the court of justice of Toulouse, in direct\ncontradiction to the ordinances of our king and the laws of all\nnations, nor with his son, Mark Antony, the extraordinary manner of\nwhose death led the judges into the error they committed; nor with\nthe mother, whose sufferings call aloud for compassion, nor yet with\nher innocent daughter, who, together with her, travelled upwards of\nsix hundred miles to lay their virtue and distresses at the foot of\nthe throne.\n\nThe God in whose presence we declare this knows that we have been\nactuated solely by the love of justice, mercy, and truth, in\ndelivering our thoughts in the manner we have done on toleration,\nin regard to John Calas, who fell a victim to non-toleration and\npersecution.\n\nWe had not the least intent to offend the eight judges of Toulouse\nin saying that they were mistaken, as the council of state itself\nsupposes them to have been; on the contrary, we have opened a way\nfor them to vindicate themselves to all Europe by acknowledging that\nequivocal circumstances, and the clamor of a headstrong and enraged\npopulace, had biassed their judgment; and by asking pardon of the\nwidow and repairing as much as in them lies the ruin they have\nbrought upon an innocent family, by adding to the number of those who\nsuccor them in their affliction. They have put the father to death\nunjustly; let them then be as fathers to his children, provided those\nchildren are willing to accept of this poor token of repentance from\nthem. It would be infinitely to the honor of the judges to make such\nan offer, and to that of the injured family to refuse it.\n\nBut it principally behooves the Sieur David, capitol of Toulouse, to\nset the example of remorse and penitence, who was the first to raise\nthis persecution against innocence, and who insulted the hapless\nfather of a family when expiring on the scaffold. This was indeed an\nunparalleled act of cruelty; but as God is willing to show mercy and\nforgiveness it is the duty of mortals to pardon in like manner those\nwho make atonement for their offences.\n\nI have received a letter from a friend in Languedoc, dated the 20th\nof February, 1763, of which the following is an extract:\n\n\u201cYour treatise on toleration appears to be full of humanity and\ntruth; but I am afraid it will rather hurt than serve the Calas\nfamily. It may gall the eight judges who were for the sentence, and\nthey may apply to the parliament to have your book burnt; besides,\nthe bigots, of whom you are sensible there is always a considerable\nnumber, will oppose the voice of reason with the clamors of\nprejudice,\u201d etc.\n\nMy answer was as follows:\n\n\u201cThe eight judges of Toulouse may, if they please, have my book\nburnt. It will cost them very little trouble, since the \u201cProvincial\nLetters,\u201d which had infinitely superior merit to anything of mine,\nwere condemned to the same fate. Every one, you know, is at liberty\nto burn in his own house such books as he does not like.\n\n\u201cMy treatise cannot possibly do either hurt or good to the Calas\nfamily, with whom I have not the least acquaintance. The king\u2019s\ncouncil is no less resolute than impartial; it judges according\nto law and equity of those things which fall properly under its\ncognizance; but it will not interfere with a common pamphlet, written\nupon a subject altogether foreign from the affair under consideration.\n\n\u201cIf a hundred volumes in folio should be written in condemnation or\nvindication of the judges of Toulouse, or of toleration, neither the\ncouncil nor any other court of justice would look upon these as law\nmatters.\n\n\u201cI readily agree with you that there are numbers of enthusiasts who\nwill set up the cry against me, but at the same time I do insist that\nI shall have as many sensible readers who will make use of their\nreason.\n\n\u201cI hear that the Parliament of Toulouse and some other courts of\njustice have a method of proceeding peculiar to themselves. They\nadmit fourths, thirds, and sixths of a proof; so that with six\nhearsays on one side, three on the other, and four-fourths of a\npresumption, they frame three complete proofs; and in consequence of\nthis curious demonstration will condemn you a man to be broken upon\nthe wheel without mercy. Now, the least acquaintance with the art of\nlogic or reasoning would point out a different method of proceeding\nto them. What we call a half proof can never amount to more than a\nsuspicion; but there is no such thing in reality as a half proof; for\na thing must either be proved or not proved; there is no medium.\n\n\u201cA million of suspicions put together can no more frame a regular\nproof than a million of ciphers can compose an arithmetical number.\n\n\u201cThere are fourths of tones or sounds in music, and these are to be\nexpressed; but there are no fourths in truths, nor in reasoning.\n\n\u201cTwo witnesses agreeing in the same deposition, are esteemed to make\na proof; but this is not enough; these two witnesses should be clear\nof all passion and prejudice, and, above all, their testimony should\nbe in every part consonant with reason.\n\n\u201cSuppose four persons of the most respectable appearance were to come\nand swear in a court of justice that they saw an infirm old man take\na vigorous young fellow by the collar and toss him out of a window,\nto the distance of six or seven feet; certainly such deponents ought\nto be sent to a madhouse.\n\n\u201cBut the eight judges of Toulouse condemned John Calas upon a much\nmore improbable accusation; for there was no one appeared to swear\nthat he had actually seen this feeble old man of seventy seize\na stout young fellow of twenty-eight, and hang him up. Indeed,\ncertain enthusiastic wretches said that they had been told by other\nenthusiasts like themselves that they had been told by some of their\nown sect that they had heard that John Calas had by a supernatural\nstrength overcome his son and hanged him. And thus was the most\nabsurd of all sentences passed upon the most absurd of all evidence.\n\n\u201cIn fine, there is no remedy against such kind of proceedings but\nthat those who purchase their seats in a court of justice should, for\nthe future, be obliged to study a little better.\u201d\n\nThis treatise on toleration is a petition which humanity with all\nsubmission presents to power and prudence. I have sowed a grain that\nmay perhaps produce a rich harvest. We may hope everything from time,\nfrom the goodness of the heart of our gracious monarch, the wisdom\nof his ministers, and the spirit of sound reason, which begins to\ndiffuse its salutary influence over all minds.\n\nNature addresses herself thus to mankind: \u201cI have formed you all\nweak and ignorant, to vegetate a few moments on that earth which\nyou are afterwards to fatten with your carcasses. Let your weakness\nthen teach you to succor each other, and as you are ignorant, bear\nwith and endeavor mutually to instruct each other. Even if ye were\nall of the same way of thinking, which certainly will never come\nto pass, and there should be one single person only found amongst\nyou who differed from you in belief, you ought to forgive him, for\nit is I who make him think in the manner he does. I have given you\nhands to cultivate the earth, and a faint glimmering of reason to\nconduct yourselves by, and I have planted in your hearts a spirit of\ncompassion, that you may assist each other under the burden of life.\nDo not smother that spark, nor suffer it to be corrupted, for know it\nis of divine origin; neither substitute the wretched debates of the\nschools in the place of the voice of nature.\n\n\u201cIt is I alone who unite you all, in despite of yourselves, by\nyour mutual wants, even in the midst of those bloody wars that you\nundertake for the slightest causes, and that afford a continual scene\nof error, chances, and misfortunes. It is I alone who, in a nation,\nprevent the fatal effects of the inextinguishable differences that\nsubsist between the sword and the law, between those two professions\nand the clergy, and between even the citizen and the husbandman.\nThough ignorant of the limits of their own prerogatives, they are\nin spite of themselves obliged to listen to my voice, which speaks\nto their hearts. It is I alone who maintain equity in the courts\nof judicature, where otherwise everything would be determined by\nerror and caprice, in the midst of a confused heap of laws, framed\ntoo often at a venture and to supply an immediate call, differing\nfrom each other in every province and town, and almost always\ncontradictory in the same place. I alone can inspire the love and\nknowledge of justice, while the laws inspire only chicanery and\nsubterfuge. He who listens to me seldom forms a wrong judgment, while\nhe who seeks only to reconcile contradictory opinions loses himself\nin the fruitless labor.\n\n\u201cThere is an immense edifice whose foundation I laid with my own\nhands. It was at once solid and simple; all mankind might have\nentered into it with safety, but they, in seeking to ornament,\noverloaded it with useless and fantastic decorations. The building is\ncontinually falling to decay, and they gather up the stones to throw\nat one another; while I am incessantly calling out to them, \u2018Hold,\nmadmen! clear away the ruins with which you are surrounded, and which\nyou yourselves have made; come and live with me in uninterrupted\ntranquillity within my mansion, that is not to be shaken.\u2019\u201d\n\n\nFOOTNOTES TO A TREATISE ON TOLERATION\n\n[2] 12 October, 1761.\n\n[3] After the body was carried to the town-house, indeed, there was\nfound a little scratch upon the end of the nose, and a small black\nand blue spot upon the breast; but these were probably occasioned by\nsome carelessness in removing the corpse.\n\n[4] I know of but two instances in history of fathers having murdered\ntheir children on the score of religion; the first is the father of\nSt. Barbara, as she is called; it seems he had ordered two windows\nto be made in his bathing-room. St. Barbara in his absence took it\ninto her head to make a third in honor of the Holy Trinity; she also\nwith the end of her finger made the sign of the cross upon the marble\npillars, which remained deeply impressed thereon; her father, in a\nviolent fury to have his room thus marked, runs after her with his\nsword in his hand with an intention to kill her; she flies towards a\nmountain, which very complaisantly opens upon her approach to give\nher a passage. Her father finds himself obliged to go round about,\nand at length gets hold of his fugitive daughter, whom he strips\nand prepares to scourge; but God envelops her with a white cloud;\nhowever, after all, her father caused her head to be struck off. This\nis the story as we find it related in the book called \u201cThe Flower of\nSaints.\u201d\n\nThe second instance is of Prince Hermenegildus, who raised a\nrebellion against the king, his father, and gave him battle in the\nyear 584, but was himself defeated and slain by one of his father\u2019s\ngenerals; however, he has been placed among the martyrs, because his\nfather was an Arian.\n\n[5] It is necessary for the English reader to understand that in\nParis it is customary for the great lawyers or counsellors employed\nin any remarkable case to publish their pleadings on each side. On\nthis occasion, however, our author observes, \u201cthat these publications\nwere pirated in several towns, by which Mrs. Calas lost the advantage\nthat was intended her by this act of generosity.\u201d\n\n[6] _D\u00e9vot_, or as we call it in English, devotee, comes from the\nLatin word _devotus_. The _devoti_ of ancient Rome were such persons\nwho devoted themselves to death for the safety or good of the\nrepublic, as the Curtii and Decii.\n\n[7] They revived the opinion of Berengarius, concerning the\neucharist; they denied that a body can exist in a thousand different\nplaces at one time, even by all the exertion of divine omnipotence;\nthey also denied that attributes can subsist without a subject;\nthey held that it was absolutely impossible that what appears to\nbe simple bread and wine to the sight, the taste, and the stomach,\ncan in the very instant of its existence be annihilated or changed\ninto another substance; in a word, they maintained all those errors\nfor which Berengarius was formerly condemned. They founded their\nbelief on several passages of the ancient fathers of the church,\nand particularly of St. Justin, who says expressly in his Dialogue\nagainst Typhon, \u201cThat the offering of fine flour is the figure of the\neucharist, which Christ has ordered us to make in commemoration of\nhis passion;\n\n \u03c7\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f21 \u03c4\u1fc6\u03c2 \u03c3\u03b5\u03bc\u03b9\u03b4\u03b1\u03bb\u03ad\u03c9\u03c2, _&c._, \u03c4\u03cd\u03c0\u03bf\u03c2 \u1f26\u03bd \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u1f04\u03c1\u03c4\u03bf\u03c5 \u03c4\u1fc6\u03c2 \u03b5\u1f50\u03c7\u03b1\u03c1\u03b9\u03c3\u03c4\u03af\u03b1\u03c2,\n \u1f43\u03bd \u03b5\u03af\u03c2 \u1f00\u03bd\u03ac\u03bc\u03bd\u03bc\u03b7\u03c3\u03b9\u03bd \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03c0\u03ac\u03b8\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2, _&c._ \u1f38\u03b7\u03c3\u03bf\u1fe6\u03c2 \u03a7\u03c1\u03b9\u03c3\u03c4\u1f78\u03c2 \u1f41 \u03c7\u03cd\u03c1\u03b9\u03bf\u03c2 \u1f21\u03bc\u1ff6\u03bd\n \u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u03ad\u03b4\u03c9\u03c7\u03b5 \u03c0\u03bf\u03b9\u03b5\u1fd6\u03bd.\u201d\n\nThey revived all that had been advanced in the first ages against\nthe worship of relics, and brought these words of Vigilantius for\ntheir authority: \u201cWhat necessity is there for your paying adoration\nor even respect to a mass of vile dust? Can it be supposed that the\nsouls of deceased martyrs retain after their death an affection for\ntheir ashes? The customs of the ancient idolaters are now introduced\ninto the Church; we begun to light tapers at noonday; we may, indeed,\nduring our lifetime, mutually pray for each other; but of what\nservice can such prayers be after death?\u201d\n\n[8] The candid and venerable President de Thou expresses himself thus\nconcerning these innocent and unfortunate persons: \u201c_Homines esse qui\ntrecentis circiter abhinc annis asperum & incultum solum vectigale a\ndominis acceperint, quod improbo labore & assiduo cultu frugum ferax\n& aptum pecori reddiderint; patientissimos eos laboris & inedi\u00e6,\na litibus abhorrentes, erga, egenos munificos, tributa principi &\nsua jura dominis sedulo & summa fide pendere; Dei cultum assiduis\nprecibus & morum innocentiam pr\u00e6 se ferre, ceterum raro divorum\ntempla adire, nisi si quando ad vicina suis finibus oppida mercandi\naut negotiorum causa divertant; quo si quandoque pedem inferant, non\ndei, divorumque statuis advolvi, nec cereos eis aut donaria ulla\nponere; non sacerdotes ab eis rogari ut pro se, aut propinquorum\nmanibus rem divinam faciant, non cruce frontem insigniri uti aliorum\nmoris est; cum c\u0153lum intonant non se lustrali aqua aspergere, sed\nsublatis in c\u0153lum oculis dei opem implorare; non religionis ergo\nperegre proficisci, non per vias ante crucium simulacra caput\naperire; sacra alio ritu, & populari lingua celebrare; non denique\nPontifici aut Episcopis honorem deferre, sed quosdam e suo numero\ndelectos pro antistibus & doctoribus habere. H\u00e6c uti ad Franciscum\nrelata VI.\u201d Id. Feb. anni &c._\n\nMadame de Cental, who was proprietor of part of the lands thus laid\nwaste and drenched in the blood of their quondam inhabitants, applied\nfor redress to Henry II., who referred her to the Parliament of\nParis. The solicitor-general of Provence, whose name was Guerin and\nwho had been the principal author of these massacres, was condemned\nto lose his head, and was the only one who suffered on this occasion\nthe punishment due to the other accomplices in his guilt, because,\nsays de Thou, _aulicorum favore destituertur_, he had not friends at\ncourt.\n\n[9] Francis Gomar was a Protestant divine; he maintained, in\ncontradiction to Arminius, his colleague, that God has, from all\neternity, predestined the greatest part of mankind to burn in\neverlasting flames: this infernal doctrine was supported in the\nmanner most suitable to it, by persecution. The grand pensionary\nBarneveldt, who was of the party which opposed Gomar, was beheaded\non the 13th of May, 1619, at the age of seventy-two, \u201c_for having_\u201d\n(says his sentence) \u201c_used his uttermost endeavors to vex the Church\nof God_.\u201d\n\n[10] A pompous writer, in his apology for the revocation of the Edict\nof Nantes, speaking of England, has these words: \u201cThese were the\nnatural fruits of a false religion; there remained only one to be\nbrought to perfection, which these islanders, justly the contempt of\nall nations, have cherished, and adapted to themselves.\u201d Certainly\nthis author has been a little unfortunate in choosing his time for\nrepresenting the English as a people despicable and despised by all\nthe world; for surely, when a nation gives the most signal proofs of\nits bravery and generosity, and when its victorious ensigns wave in\nthe four parts of the world, no great credit is to be given to the\nwriter who shall represent it as contemptible and contemned. But we\nmust observe that it is in a chapter in favor of persecution that we\nmeet with this extraordinary passage; and none but such as preach\npersecution can write thus. This detestable book, which seems the\nwork of a madman, was composed by a person who has no ecclesiastical\ncure; for what real pastor would write in such a manner? The author\nhas even carried his enthusiastic fury to such a length as to\njustify the massacre of St. Bartholomew. It might be supposed that a\nproduction full of such shocking paradoxes would be in the hands of\nalmost every one, were it only on account of its singularity, and yet\nit seems to be hardly known.\n\n[11] See Ricaut.\n\n[12] See Kempfer, and all the accounts of Japan.\n\n[13] M. de la Bourdonnaie, intendant of Rouen, says that the\nmanufacture of hats at Caudebec and Neufch\u00e2tel has greatly fallen off\nsince the refugees left that county. M. Foucaut, intendant of Caen,\nsays that trade in general has declined through the whole district;\nand M. de Maupeou, intendant of Poitiers, that the manufacture\nof druggets is quite lost. M. de Bezons complains that there is\nnow hardly any trade stirring in Cl\u00e9rac and N\u00e9rac. M. Mirom\u00e9nil,\nintendant of Touraine, says that the trade of Tours has diminished\nnear ten millions per annum, and all this through the persecution\nraised in that part of the kingdom. (See the Memorials of the\nIntendants in the year 1698.) To this, if we add the number of land\nand sea officers and common sailors who have been forced to engage\nin foreign services, frequently with fatal consequences to their own\ncountry, we shall then see whether or no persecution has been fatal\nto the state.\n\nWe will not here presume to offer any hints to those ministers whose\nconduct and capacity are sufficiently known, and whose greatness of\nsoul and nobleness of sentiment do honor to their illustrious birth;\nthey will of themselves readily perceive that the restoration of\nour marine will require some indulgence at least to be shown to the\ninhabitants of our sea-coasts.\n\n[14] These disabilities no longer exist in Protestant countries.\n\n[15] Chap. xxi., xxii.\n\n[16] Acts xxv.\n\n[17] Acts xxvi.\n\n[18] Though the power of life and death in criminal matters had\nbeen taken from the Jews after the banishment of Archelaus into the\ncountry of the Allobroges and that Jud\u00e6a had been governed as a\nprovince, nevertheless the Romans frequently winked at the exertion\nof a judicial power by these people on any particular occasion that\nrelated merely to those of their own sect, such as, for instance,\nwhen in any sudden tumult they out of zeal stoned to death the person\nwhom they thought guilty of blasphemy.\n\n[19] Ulpianus I. tit. II. _Eis qui judaicam superstitionem sequuntur,\nhonores adipisci permiserunt, &c._\n\n[20] Tacitus\u2019 words are: _Quos per flagitia invisos vulgus\nChristianos appellabat_.\n\nIt is hardly probable that the name of Christian was already known\nin Rome. Tacitus wrote in the reigns of the Emperors Vespasian and\nDomitian, and he speaks of the Christians in the manner that was\ncustomary in his time. And here I must venture to assert that the\nwords _Odio humani generis convicti_, may equally well be rendered\nagreeably to the style of this writer, _Convicted of being hated by\nmankind_, as _Convicted of hating all mankind_.\n\nAnd indeed, what was the employment of these first missionaries in\nRome? They labored to gain a few proselytes by preaching a pure and\nsimple moral doctrine; the humility of their hearts, and the modesty\nof their manners were equal to the lowliness of their condition and\ncircumstances. Having been so lately separated from the Jews, they\nwere hardly known in the world as a different sect; how then could\nthey be hated by, or convicted of hating all mankind, to whom they\nwere in a manner unknown?\n\nThe Roman Catholics have been accused as the incendiaries of the city\nof London in the year 1666, but not till they had first occasioned\ncivil wars on account of religion; and after several of that faith,\nthough unworthy to be so, had been legally convicted of the Gunpowder\nPlot.\n\nBut surely the case of the primitive Christians in the time of Nero\nwas very different. It is no easy matter to clear up the obscurities\nof history. Even Tacitus himself says nothing that can afford a\nreason to suspect Nero of having set fire to Rome; and we might, with\na greater appearance of probability, charge Charles II. with having\nlighted up the flames that laid London in ashes, to avenge the blood\nof his father, that had been so lately shed upon the scaffold to\nsatisfy a rebellious people who thirsted for that blood. Charles had\nat least some excuse for such an action, whereas Nero had neither\nexcuse, pretence, nor interest for the deed attributed to him.\nReports of this kind have been common in every country among the\npopulace, and even our own times have furnished us with some equally\nfalse and ridiculous.\n\nTacitus, who was so well acquainted with the disposition of princes,\ncould not have been a stranger to that of the common people, who\nare ever vain, inconstant, and violent in the opinions they adopt,\nincapable of discerning truth from falsehood, and ready to believe,\nassert, and forget everything.\n\nPhilo says that \u201cSejanus persecuted the Jews under Tiberius, but\nthat after the death of Sejanus, the emperor reinstated them in\nall their privileges,\u201d one of which was, that of being denizens of\nRome, notwithstanding the contempt they were held in by the Romans.\nAs such, they had a share in the distribution of corn, and whenever\nsuch distribution happened to be made on the day that was their\nSabbath, the portion allotted them was put by till the next day; this\nindulgence might probably be granted them in favor of the great sums\nof money with which they furnished the state; for they have purchased\ntoleration in every country at a pretty high rate, though, it must be\nconfessed, that they have soon found means to reimburse themselves.\n\nThis passage of Philo\u2019s clearly explains one in Tacitus, where he\nsays that \u201cFour thousand Jews or Egyptians were banished to Sardinia,\nwhere, if they had all perished, through the badness of the climate,\nit would have been no great loss.\u201d _Vile damnum._\n\nBefore I close this note, I shall observe that Philo speaks of\nTiberius as a wise and just prince. I am very ready to believe that\nhe was so, only where the being such was agreeable to his interest;\nbut the good character given him here by Philo makes me at the same\ntime greatly suspect the truth of those terrible crimes with which\nTacitus and Suetonius reproach him. Nor can I think it likely that\nan infirm old man of seventy would have retired into the island of\nCaprera to indulge himself in the uninterrupted exercise of a refined\ndebauchery, which appears to be hardly natural, and was, even in\nthose days of licentiousness, unknown to the most abandoned of the\nRoman youth. Neither Tacitus nor Suetonius was acquainted with that\nemperor; but took these stories upon the credit of vulgar reports;\nOctavius and Tiberius C\u00e6sar, and their successors, had been detested\nfor reigning over a free people without their consent. All historians\nhave taken a delight in bespattering their characters, and the world\nhas taken them at their words for want of authentic memorials or\nchronicles in those times. Besides, as these writers do not quote\nany authority for what they advance, who could contradict them? They\nblackened whom they pleased, and wantonly directed the judgment of\nposterity. The wise and impartial reader will, however, readily\nperceive how far the veracity of historians is to be depended on, and\nwhat degree of credit is due to public facts attested by authors of\nreputation, born in a learned and enlightened nation, as well as what\nbounds to set to our belief of anecdotes, when related by these same\nauthors, without any authority to support them.\n\n[21] We most certainly have a proper deference for whatever the Holy\nChurch has made the objects of our reverence; accordingly, we invoke\nthe blessed martyrs; but at the same time that we pay St. Laurence\nall due respect, may we not be permitted to doubt that St. Sixtus\nsaid to him: \u201cYou will follow me in three days.\u201d That, during this\nshort interval, the prefect of Rome made him demand a sum of money\nof the Christians; that Laurence had time to assemble all the poor\npeople in that city; that he walked before the prefect, to show him\nthe place where they were assembled; that he was afterwards tried\nand condemned to the torture; that the prefect ordered the smith to\nmake a gridiron large enough to broil a man upon; that the principal\nmagistrate of Rome assisted in person at this strange execution; and\nlastly that St. Laurence, while upon the gridiron, called out to him,\n\u201cI am done enough on this side, let them turn me on the other, if you\nhave a mind to eat me.\u201d This same gridiron seems to have very little\nof the Roman genius in it; and besides, how happens it that we do not\nfind a word of this story in any of the heathen writers?\n\n[22] We have only to open Virgil to be convinced that the Romans\nacknowledged one Supreme Being, the lord and master of all other\nheavenly beings.\n\n         _O! quis res hominumque deumque_\n _\u00c6ternis regis imperiis, & fulmine terres,_\n _O pater, o hominum divumque \u00e6terna potestas, &c._\n\nAnd Horace expresses himself still more strongly:\n\n _Unde nil majus generatur ipso,_\n _Nec viget quidquam simile, aut secundum._\n\nIn those mysteries into which almost all the Roman youths were\ninitiated, nothing else was sung but the unity of God. See the\nnoble hymn of Orpheus, and the letter of Maximus of Modarum to St.\nAugustine, in which he says that \u201cNone but fools can possibly deny\na Supreme Being.\u201d Longinus, who was a heathen, writes also to St.\nAugustine that \u201cGod is one, incomprehensible, ineffable.\u201d Even\nLactantius, who certainly cannot be charged with being too indulgent,\nacknowledges in his fifth book that \u201cThe Romans subjected all the\nother deities to the one supreme God;\u201d _illos subjecit & mancipat\nDeo_. Tertullian also in his Apology confesses that \u201cThe whole empire\nacknowledged one God, ruler of the world, and infinite in power and\nmajesty:\u201d _Principem mundi perfect\u00e6 potenti\u00e6 & majestatis_. Again, if\nwe look into Plato, who taught Cicero his philosophy, we shall there\nfind him thus express himself: \u201cThere is but one God, whom we all\nought to love and adore, and labor to resemble Him in integrity and\nholiness.\u201d Epictetus in a dungeon, and Mark Antoninus on a throne,\ntell us the same in a hundred different passages of their writings.\n\n[23] Chap. 39.\n\n[24] Chap. 35.\n\n[25] Chap. iii.\n\n[26] This assertion requires to be proved. It cannot be denied that\nfrom the time that history succeeded to fiction, the Egyptians\nhave constantly appeared to be a people as dastardly as they were\nsuperstitious. Cambyses made the conquest of their country in a\nsingle battle; Alexander gave them laws without striking a stroke,\nor without one of their cities daring to wait a siege. The Ptolemies\nsubdued them with as little trouble, nor did Octavius and Augustus\nC\u00e6sar find more difficulty in bringing them under their obedience.\nOmar overran all Egypt in one single campaign; the Mamelukes, who\ninhabited Colchis and the regions of Mount Caucasus, became their\nmasters afterwards; and it was these people, and not the Egyptians,\nwho defeated the army of St. Louis, and took that king prisoner. At\nlength the Mamelukes having, in process of time, become Egyptians,\nthat is to say, effeminate, cowardly, lazy, and dissipated, like the\noriginal natives of the climate, they were in three months\u2019 time\nbrought under the yoke of Selim I., who caused their Soldan to be\nhanged, and made their kingdom a province of the Turkish Empire,\nand such it will remain till other barbarians may hereafter make\nthemselves masters of it.\n\nHerodotus relates that in the fabulous ages a king of Egypt called\nSesostris left his country in order to go and make the conquest of\nthe world; it is evident that such a design could only be worthy of\na Don Quixote; and not to mention that the name Sesostris is not\nEgyptian, we may rank this event, like many others of the same date,\namong the romances and fairy tales. Nothing is more common among\na conquered people than to tell strange stories of their former\ngrandeur, just as, in some countries, certain wretched families,\nin want of the common necessaries of life, pride themselves upon\nbeing descended from ancient sovereigns. The Egyptian priests told\nHerodotus that this king, whom he called Sesostris, went on an\nexpedition to conquer Colchis, which is much the same as if we were\nto say that a king of France set out from Touraine to conquer Norway.\n\nIt avails not that these stories are found repeated in a thousand\ndifferent writers; it makes them not a whit more probable; it is much\nmore natural to suppose that the fierce and athletic inhabitants of\nMount Caucasus, of Colchis, and the other parts of Scythia, who so\noften made incursions upon and ravaged Asia, might have penetrated as\nfar as Egypt; and although the priests of Colchis might afterwards\nhave carried back with them the form of circumcision, yet that is\nno kind of proof that they were ever conquered by the Egyptians.\nDiodorus Siculus tells us that all the kings who were conquered\nby Sesostris came every year from their own kingdoms to bring him\ntheir respective tributes, when Sesostris made them draw the chariot\nin which he went in triumph to the temples of his gods. These old\nwomen\u2019s stories we see every day gravely copied by other writers; it\nmust be confessed that these kings were very complaisant, to come\nevery year so far to be made hackney horses of.\n\nAs to their pyramids, and other monuments of antiquity, they prove\nnothing but the pride and bad taste of the Egyptian princes, and\nthe wretched slavery of a weak people, who employed their strength,\nwhich was their only support, in pleasing the barbarous ostentation\nof their masters. The polity of these people, even in those times\nwhich are so much cried up, appears to have been both absurd and\ntyrannical; they pretended that the whole universe belonged to their\nmonarchy. It well became such an abject race to set up for conquerors\nof the world!\n\nThe profound learning which we find attributed to the Egyptian\npriests is also one of the most ridiculous absurdities in ancient\nhistory, that is to say, in fable. People who pretended that in a\nrevolution of eleven thousand years the sun had risen twice in the\nwest and set twice in the east in beginning his course anew were\ndoubtless curious astronomers. The religion of these priests, who\ngoverned the state, was inferior even to that of the most savage\npeople of America; every one knows that crocodiles, monkeys, cats,\nand onions were the objects of their adoration; and there is not\nperhaps in the world so absurd a worship, excepting that of the Great\nLama.\n\nTheir arts were as mean as their religion; there is not one ancient\nEgyptian statue fit to be seen; and whatever they had amongst them\nof any merit came from Alexandria in the times of the Ptolemies and\nC\u00e6sars and was the work of Grecian artists; nay, they were even\nobliged to send to Greece for masters to teach them geometry.\n\nThe illustrious Bossuet, in his discourse upon universal history,\ndedicated to the son of Louis the Fourteenth, runs wild in his\nencomiums upon the merits of the Egyptians; this may dazzle the\nunderstanding of a young prince, but will never satisfy men of\nlearning. This production is a very fine piece of eloquence, but\na historian should be more of the philosopher than the orator.\nThe reflections here offered concerning the Egyptians are merely\nconjectural; for by what other name can we call anything that is said\nconcerning antiquity?\n\n[27] Though we do not presume to doubt the suffering of St. Ignatius,\nyet, can any man of common understanding, who reads the account of\nhis martyrdom, prevent some doubts from rising in his mind? The\nunknown author of this narrative says: \u201cTrajan thought his glory\nwould not be complete unless he subjected the God of the Christians\nto his obedience.\u201d What a thought! Was Trajan the kind of man who\ncould desire to triumph over the gods? The emperor is said to have\nthus accosted Ignatius when he was brought before him: \u201cWho art thou,\nunclean spirit?\u201d It is very unlikely that an emperor would have\ndiscoursed with a prisoner, or have passed sentence upon him himself;\nit is not customary for sovereign princes to do so. Trajan might\npossibly cause Ignatius to be brought before him, but he would not\nsay to him, \u201cWho art thou?\u201d since he knew very well who he was. And\nas to the term \u201cunclean spirit,\u201d could it possibly have been used by\nsuch a man as Trajan? Is it not evident that this is an expression\nused in exorcising, and put by a Christian into the emperor\u2019s mouth?\nGood heavens! what a style for Trajan.\n\nCan we imagine that Ignatius answered him that he was called\nTheophorus, because he carried Jesus in his heart, and that Trajan\nentered into a long conversation with him concerning Christ? They\nmake Trajan say at the end of this conference: \u201cWe command that\nIgnatius, who glories in carrying within him the crucified man, be\nthrown into prison loaded with chains,\u201d etc. A sophist, a foe to\nChristianity, might call Jesus Christ _the crucified man_; but it is\nhardly probable that such a term would have been used in a decree.\nThe punishment of the cross was so common among the Romans that they\ncould not in their law style think of distinguishing by the words\n\u201ccrucified man\u201d the object of the Christians\u2019 worship; nor is it in\nthis manner that the laws or the emperors pronounced sentence.\n\nThey afterwards make Ignatius write a long letter to the Christians\nof Rome. \u201cI write to you,\u201d says he, \u201cthough loaded with chains.\u201d\nCertainly, if he was allowed to write to the Christians of Rome,\nthose Christians were not considered as the objects of persecution;\nconsequently, Trajan could have no design to subject their God to his\nobedience; or, on the other hand, if these Christians were actually\nliable to persecution, Ignatius was guilty of very great imprudence\nin regard to them, since this was betraying them to their enemies and\nmaking himself an informer against them.\n\nSurely those who had the compiling of these facts should have had\ngreater regard to probability and the circumstances of the times. The\nmartyrdom of St. Polycarp also occasions some doubts. It is said that\na voice called to him from heaven, saying: \u201cCourage, Polycarp!\u201d that\nthis voice was distinctly heard by the Christians, but by no other\nof the attendants: we are told also, that when Polycarp was tied to\nthe stake, and the fire lighted round him, the flames parted asunder,\nand a dove flew out from the midst of them; and that this saint, to\nwhom the fire showed so much respect, exhaled an aromatic odor that\nperfumed the whole assembly; nevertheless, he whom the fire dared\nnot to approach, could not resist the edge of the sword. Surely we\nmay hope for pardon if we discover more piety than truth in these\nrelations.\n\n[28] Hist. Ecclesiast. lib. viii.\n\n[29] The Catholic priests are now numbered by thousands in Great\nBritain and Ireland.\n\n[30] See Mr. Locke\u2019s excellent letter upon toleration.\n\n[31] The Jesuit Busembaum, and his commentator, the Jesuit La Croix,\ntell us, that it \u201cis lawful to kill any prince excommunicated by the\nPope, of whatsoever country, because the whole world belongs to the\nPope; and that whoever accepts of or executes such commission does a\nmeritorious and charitable act.\u201d It is this maxim which seems to have\nbeen invented in the madhouses of hell, that has almost stirred up\nall France against the Jesuits, who are now more than ever reproached\nfor this doctrine, which they have so often preached, and as often\ndisavowed. They have endeavored to justify themselves by producing\nnearly the same maxims in the writings of St. Thomas Aquinas and\nseveral Dominicans.* It is true, indeed, that this St. Thomas,\nthe angelic Doctor and Interpreter of the Divine Will, advances\nthat an apostate prince loses his right to the crown, and forfeits\nthe obedience due to him from his subjects;\u2020 that the Church may\ncondemn him to death; that the Emperor Julian was permitted to reign\nonly because he was too powerful to be resisted: that we ought to\nkill every heretic:\u2021 that those who deliver a people from the\ngovernment of a tyrannical prince, etc., etc. We have, doubtless, a\ngreat respect for the angel of the schools; but if he had preached up\nsuch maxims in France at the time of his brother James Clement, and\nthe mendicant Ravaillac, his angelical doctorship would have met with\nbut a scurvy reception.\n\n                    * Peruse, if you can get it, the letter of a\n                    layman to a divine on the subject of St. Thomas,\n                    a Jesuitical pamphlet published in 1762.\n\n                    \u2020 Lib. ii. part ii. question 12.\n\n                    \u2021 Ibid. Questions 11 and 12.\n\nIt must be confessed that John Gerson, chancellor of the University,\ncarried the matter yet further than St. Thomas; and John Petit, the\nFranciscan, still further than Gerson. Several of the order openly\nmaintained the detestable maxims of their brother Petit. It must be\nacknowledged that this hellish doctrine of king-killing proceeds\nwholly from the ridiculous notion which has so long prevailed amongst\nall orders of monks, that the Pope is a God upon earth, and can\ndispose of the crowns and lives of sovereigns at his pleasure. In\nthis respect, we are inferior even to those Tartarian idolaters who\nheld the Grand Lama to be immortal; greedily gather the contents of\nhis close-stool, dry these precious relics with great care, enclose\nthem in rich cases, and kiss them with the warmest devotion. For my\npart, I confess that I had rather, for the good of my country, and\nthe sake of public tranquillity, carry those relics constantly about\nmy neck, than to give my assent to the Pope\u2019s having in any case\nwhatsoever an authority over the temporals of kings, or even those of\na private person.\n\n[32] Chap. ii. 11\u201314.\n\n[33] Deut. xiv.\n\n[34] Agreeable to my intention of making some useful notes upon this\ntreatise, I shall here observe that although God is said to have\nmade a covenant with Noah, and with all the beasts of the field, yet\nhe permits him to eat of every thing that has the breath of life,\nexcepting only the eating of blood, which he positively prohibits;\nand moreover adds that \u201cthe Lord will take vengeance of every beast\nby whom man\u2019s blood shall be shed.\u201d\n\nFrom these passages and several others of the like tenor, we may\ninfer, with all the sages of ancient and present times, and with\nevery person of enlightened conceptions, that beasts are endowed with\nsome knowledge. We do not find God making a covenant with trees or\nwith stones that have no sense; but He does with the beasts, whom\nit has pleased Him to endow with senses, frequently more exquisite\nthan our own, and consequently with those ideas that are necessarily\nconnected with sense. It is for this reason that He prohibits the\nbarbarous custom of feeding upon their blood, the blood being the\nsource of life, and consequently of sense. Take away all the blood\nfrom an animal and all his organs will immediately cease from action.\nIt is therefore with the greatest justice that we find it said in so\nmany different parts of the Holy Scripture, that the soul, that is to\nsay, what was called the sensitive soul, is in the blood; an opinion\nperfectly agreeable to nature, and as such received by all nations.\n\nIt is upon this opinion that we found that pity which we ought to\nshow to all animals. It is one of the seven precepts of the Noachides\nthat were adopted by the Jews, that no one shall eat the limb of a\nliving animal. This precept is a proof that mankind had formerly the\ncruelty to mutilate animals in order to feast upon the limbs so cut\noff, and to leave the creatures living, in order to feed successively\nupon the other parts of their bodies; a custom which we find to\nhave actually subsisted among some barbarous nations\u2014witness the\nsacrifices offered in the island of Chios to _Bacchus Omadios_, or\nthe eater of raw flesh. God, by permitting the flesh of animals to\nserve us for food, seems to recommend them to our humanity. It must\nbe confessed that there is great cruelty in putting them to torture,\nand that nothing but custom could have lessened in us the natural\nabhorrence of slaughtering an animal that we have fed with our own\nhands. There have in all times been sects who have made a religious\nscruple of such practices, as do to this day all the inhabitants of\nthe Peninsula of the Ganges. The whole sect of Pythagoreans, both in\nGreece and Italy, constantly abstained from the eating of flesh. And\nPorphyry, in his book upon \u201cAbstinence,\u201d reproaches his disciples\nwith having quitted their sect only for the sake of indulging an\ninhuman appetite.\n\nIt is in my opinion a giving up of the light of reason, to pretend\nto assert that beasts are no more than mere machines; for is it not\na manifest contradiction to acknowledge that God has given them the\norgans of sense, and then to affirm that they have no sense?\n\nBesides, I think one must never have made any observation upon\nanimals, not to distinguish in them the different cries of want,\nsuffering, joy, fear, love, anger, and indeed all other affections of\nthe mind or body; surely, it would be very strange that they should\nso well express what they have no sense of!\n\nThis remark may furnish abundant matter of reflection to inquisitive\nminds, in relation to the power and goodness of the Creator, who has\nbeen pleased to bestow life, sense, ideas, and memory on those beings\nwhose organs he has formed with His own all-powerful hand. As to us,\nwe neither know how these organs are formed, how they are unfolded,\nin what manner we receive life, nor by what laws sense, ideas,\nmemory, and will are annexed to that life; and yet in this dark and\nternal state of ignorance inherent to our natures, we are perpetually\ndisputing with, and persecuting one another, like the bulls of the\nfield, who fight with their horns, without knowing for what use, or\nin what manner those horns were given them.\n\n[35] Amos v. 26.\n\n[36] Jer. vii. 22.\n\n[37] Acts vii. 42.\n\n[38] Deut. xii. 8.\n\n[39] Several writers have too rashly concluded from this passage that\nthe chapter concerning the golden calf\u2014which is no other than the\nEgyptian god Apis\u2014has, as well as many other chapters, been added to\nthe books of Moses.\n\nEben-Ezra was the first who undertook to prove that the Pentateuch\u2014or\nthe five books of Moses\u2014was written in the times of the Kings.\nWollaston, Collins, Tindal, Shaftesbury, Bolingbroke, and many\nothers have asserted that in those ages men had no other way of\ncommitting their thoughts to writing but by engraving them upon\npolished stone, brick, lead, or wood; and tell us that in the time\nof Moses the Chald\u00e6ans and Egyptians had no other way of writing,\nand that then they could engrave but in a very abridged manner, and\nby hieroglyphics, the substance only of such things as they thought\nworthy of being transmitted to posterity, and could never form any\nregular histories; then it was next to an impossibility to engrave\nbooks of any considerable bulk in the wilderness, where they were\ncontinually changing their habitation; where they had no person to\nfurnish them with clothing, to make that clothing for them, or even\nto mend their sandals, and where God was obliged to perform a miracle\nto preserve the garments of His people entire. They say that it is\nhardly probable that there should have been so many engravers among\nthem, at the time that they were so deficient in the more necessary\narts of life, and did not know even how to make bread; and if we\nanswer to this, that the pillars of the tabernacle were of brass, and\ntheir chapiters of massy silver they reply, that though the order for\nthis might have been given in the wilderness, it was not executed\ntill after they were settled in perfect tranquillity.\n\nThey cannot conceive, they say, how the Israelites, who were a poor\nand vagabond people, could have asked for a calf of massy gold to\nbe erected for the object of their adoration, at the foot of the\nvery mountain where God was then talking with Moses, and in the very\nmidst of the thunder and lightning, and the sound of the heavenly\ntrumpet, which were heard and seen by all present. They profess\ntheir astonishment that it should have been only the day before\nMoses descended from the mountain, that all the people should have\naddressed themselves to his brother Aaron to raise this golden calf;\nor how it was possible for Aaron to have cast such an image in one\nsingle day; and still more, how Moses could have reduced it into an\nimpalpable powder. They say that it is impossible for any artist to\nmake a statue of gold in less than three months, and that not all the\npossible efforts of the chemical art are sufficient to reduce such a\nmass into a powder that may be swallowed, and consequently, that the\nprevarication of Aaron and this operation of Moses must have been two\nmiracles.\n\nDeceived by the humanity and goodness of their hearts, they cannot\nbelieve that Moses slaughtered three and twenty thousand souls to\nexpiate this crime; nor, that so many men would have tamely suffered\nthemselves to be murdered without a third miracle. Lastly, they think\nit very extraordinary that Aaron, who was the most guilty of all,\nshould have been rewarded for that very crime for which the rest\nunderwent so dreadful a punishment, by being created high-priest, and\ngo to offer sacrifice at the high altar, while the bodies of three\nand twenty thousand of his slaughtered brethren lay bleeding round\nhim.\n\nThey start the same difficulties concerning the eighty thousand\nIsraelites who were slain by order of Moses, to atone for the crime\nof a single one of them, for being surprised with a Moabite woman;\nand seeing that Solomon, and so many other of the Jewish kings did,\nwithout being punished for it, take to themselves strange wives, they\ncannot conceive what great crime there could be in an individual\nmaking an alliance with one Moabite woman.\n\nRuth was a Moabitess, though her family was originally of Bethlehem;\nthe Scripture always distinguishes her by the name of Ruth the\nMoabitess; and yet she went and laid herself by the side of Boaz,\nreceived six measures of barley from him, was afterwards married to\nhim, and was the grandmother of David. Rahab was not only a stranger,\nbut also a common prostitute, or a harlot, as she is called in\nScripture; yet she was taken to wife by Solomon, a prince of Jud\u00e6a;\nfrom whom also David was descended. This Rahab is taken to be a\ntype of the Christian church by several of the ancient fathers; and\nespecially by Origen, in his seventh homily on Joshua.\n\nBathsheba, the wife of Uriah, by whom David begat Solomon, was a\nHittite. And if we go farther back, we shall find that the patriarch\nJudah married a Canaanitess; and his sons lay with Thamar, who was of\nthe race of Aaron; and the woman with whom Judah, without knowing it,\ncommitted incest, was not of the Israelitish race.\n\nThus then was our Lord Jesus Christ pleased to take upon him flesh\nin a family descended from five aliens, to show that all nations\nshould partake of his inheritance. The rabbi Eben-Ezra was, as we\nhave already observed, the first who undertook to prove that the\nPentateuch was compiled long after the time of Moses; and for his\nauthority quotes several passages in those books; and amongst others\nthe following: \u201cThe Canaanite then dwelt in that land. The mountain\nof Moriah, called the Mountain of God. The bed of Og, king of Bashan,\nis still to be seen in Rabah. And the country of Bashan is called\nthe villages of Jaiar unto this day. Never was there a prophet\nseen in Israel like unto Moses. These are the kings who reigned in\nEdom, before any king reigned over Israel.\u201d He pretends that these\npassages, in which mention is made of events that happened long after\nthe time of Moses, could never have been written by Moses himself. To\nthis it is replied, that these passages were added long after by way\nof notes by the transcribers.\n\nNewton, whose name ought on every other occasion to be mentioned with\nrespect, but who, as a man, may have been liable to error, in the\nintroduction to his commentaries upon Daniel and St. John, ascribes\nthe five books of Moses, Joshua, and Judges to holy writers of much\nlater date; and founds his opinion on the thirty-sixth chapter of\nGenesis, the seventeenth, eighteenth, nineteenth, and twenty-first\nchapters of Judges, the eighth chapter of Samuel, the second chapter\nof Chronicles, and the fourth chapter of the book of Ruth; and\nindeed, considering that in the thirty-sixth chapter of Genesis\nwe find mention made of Kings, and that David is spoken of in the\nbooks of Judges and that of Ruth, it should seem that those books\nwere compiled in the times of the Kings. This is also the opinion\nof several divines, at the head of whom is the famous Le Clerc. But\nthere are very few of those who are followers of this opinion, that\nhave had the curiosity to fathom these mysteries; a curiosity which\ncertainly makes no part of the duty of man. For when the learned and\nthe ignorant, the prince and the peasant, shall, after this short\nlife, appear together before the throne of Eternal Majesty, every\none of us then will wish to have been just and humane, generous and\ncompassionate; and no one will pride himself in having known exactly\nthe year in which the Pentateuch was written, or in having been able\nto distinguish the true text from the additional notes in use among\nthe Scribes. God will not ask us whether we were of the opinion of\nthe Masorites against the Talmud, or whether we may not have mistaken\na _Caph_ for a _Beth_, a _Yod_ for a _Vau_, or a _Daleth_ for a\n_Resh_. No, certainly; but he will judge us according to our deeds,\nand not according to our knowledge of the Hebrew language. Let us\ntherefore abide firmly by the decision of the Church, so far as is\nagreeable to the reasonable duty of a believer.\n\nWe will conclude this note with an important passage from Leviticus,\na book composed after the time of the golden calf. The Jews are there\ncommanded no more to offer their sacrifices to goats with whom they\nhave gone a-whoring.* We cannot say whether this strange worship\ncame from Egypt, the country of sorcery and superstition; but there\nis reason to believe, that the custom of our pretended magicians of\nkeeping a Sabbath apart, for adoring a goat, and committing such\ndetestable uncleanliness with it as is shocking to conception, came\nfrom the ancient Jews, as it is certain that they first taught a\npart of Europe the practice of magic. What a detestable people!\nSurely such infamous and unnatural practices deserve the punishment\nat least equal to that which befell them for worshipping the golden\ncalf; and yet, we find the lawgiver contents himself with simply\nprohibiting those practices. We have quoted this subject only to show\nwhat the Jewish nation was; the sin of bestiality must certainly have\nbeen very common amongst them, since they are the only people we\nknow among whom there was a necessity for any law to prohibit that\ncrime, the commission of which was not even suspected by any other\nlegislators.\n\n                    * Leviticus vii. and xviii. 22.\n\nThere is reason to believe that on account of the fatigues and\ndistresses which the Jews suffered in the deserts of Paran, Horeb,\nand Kadash-Barnea, the female species, which is always the weakest,\nmight have failed amongst them; and it is certain that the Jews were\ngreatly in want of women, since we find them almost always commanded,\nwhen they conquered any town or village, to the right or left of the\nlake Asphaltes, to put all the inhabitants to the sword, excepting\nonly the young women who were of an age to know man.\n\nThe Arabs, who still inhabit a part of these deserts, stipulate to\nthis day in the treaties which they make with the caravans, that\nthey shall furnish them with marriageable women; so that it is not\nimprobable but that the young men of those barren countries might\nhave carried the depravation of human nature so far as to have\nhad carnal commerce with goats, as is related of the shepherds of\nCalabria.\n\nIt is still, however, uncertain whether any monsters were produced\nby this unnatural copulation, and whether there is any foundation\nfor the ancient stories of satyrs, fauns, centaurs, and minotaurs;\nhistory says there is; but natural philosophy has not yet cleared up\nto us this monstrous circumstance.\n\n[40] Num. xxi 9.\n\n[41] Midian was not included in the Land of Promise; it is a little\ncanton of Idum\u00e6a, in Arabia Petr\u00e6a, beginning to the northward of the\ntorrent of Arron, and ending at the torrent of Zared, in the midst of\nrocks on the eastern border of the lake Asphaltes. This country is\ninhabited by a small Arabian horde or tribe, and may be about eight\nleagues long and about seven in breadth.\n\n[42] Num. xxxi.\n\n[43] Num. xxxi. 40.\n\n[44] It is plain by the text that Jephthah did actually sacrifice his\ndaughter. Doctor Calmet; in his dissertation upon Jephthah\u2019s vow,\nsays, that \u201cGod did not approve these vows; but when once any one had\nmade them, he insisted upon their being fulfilled, was it only to\npunish those who made them, and to put a check upon them in the doing\nit by fear of being obliged to perform them.\u201d This action of Jephthah\nis condemned by St. Augustine and almost all the fathers, although\nthe Scripture says that he was filled with the spirit of God; and St.\nPaul in the eleventh chapter of his Epistle to the Hebrews, greatly\npraises Jephthah, exalting him even above Samuel and David.\n\nSt. Jerome, in his Epistle to Julian, expresses himself thus;\n\u201cJephthah sacrificed his daughter to the Lord, and therefore the\nApostle has placed him among the saints.\u201d Here now is a diversity\nin opinions, concerning which it is not permitted us to pronounce a\ndecision; nay, it is even dangerous to have any opinion of our own.\n\n[45] The death of Agag, king of the Amalekites, may be looked upon as\na real sacrifice. Saul had made this prince a prisoner of war, and\nhad admitted him to a capitulation notwithstanding that the priest\nand the prophet Samuel had charged him to spare no one; saying to him\nexpressly: \u201cGo and smite Amalek, and utterly destroy all that they\nhave, and spare them not, but slay both man and woman, infant and\nsuckling, ox and sheep, camel and ass.\u201d\u2014\u201cAnd Samuel hewed Agag in\npieces before the Lord at Gilgal.\u201d\n\n\u201cThe zeal with which this prophet was animated,\u201d says Calmet, \u201cput a\nsword into his hand on this occasion, to revenge the honor of God,\nand to confound Saul.\u201d\n\nIn this melancholy adventure, we have a vow, a priest, and a victim;\nconsequently, it is a real sacrifice. We find from history that most\nnations, the Chinese excepted, were wont to sacrifice human victims\nto the Deity; Plutarch says, that this custom prevailed even among\nthe Romans at some certain times. C\u00e6sar in his \u201cCommentaries\u201d tells\nus that the Germans were going to sacrifice two of his officers,\nwhom he had sent to confer with their king, Ariovistus, had not\nC\u00e6sar delivered them by beating the German army. I have in another\nplace observed,* that this violation of the laws of nations, and\nthe offering of human victims, which was rendered more horrible\nby its being done by the hands of their women, seems a little to\ncontradict Tacitus\u2019s panegyric on them in his treatise \u201c_De Moribus\nGermanorum_,\u201d which seems rather to have been designed as a satire\nupon the Roman people, than to praise the Germans, to whom he was an\nutter stranger. And here we may observe by the way, that Tacitus was\nfonder of satire than of truth; he labors to throw everything, even\nthe most indifferent actions, into an odious point of light; and his\nmalice pleases us as much as his style, because we are naturally fond\nof wit and slander.\n\n                    * Additions to General History, part i., of\n                    Voltaire.\n\nBut to return to the subject of human sacrifices. This custom\nprevailed as much among our forefathers as with the Germans; it is\nthe lowest degree of debasement to which human nature can fall when\nleft to herself, and is one of the effects of the weakness of mortal\nunderstanding, which reasons thus: We ought to offer to God whatever\nwe have of most pleasing or valuable; there is nothing more valuable\nthan our children; therefore we ought to select the youngest and most\nbeautiful to sacrifice them to the Deity.\n\nPhilo says that the Canaanites used to offer their children in\nsacrifice, before God had commanded Abraham, as a trial of his faith,\nto offer up his only son, Isaac.\n\nSanchoniathon, as quoted by Eusebius, says that the Ph\u0153nicians, when\nthreatened with any great danger or distress, offered up the most\nfavorite of their children, and that Ilus sacrificed his son, Jehud,\nmuch about the same time that God made the trial of Abraham\u2019s faith.\nIt is very difficult to penetrate into the dark recesses of early\nantiquity; but it is too melancholy a truth that these horrible\nsacrifices were almost everywhere in use; and men have laid them\naside, only in proportion as they have become civilized. So true is\nit that civilization is the nurse of humanity.\n\n[46] Ezek. xxxix. 49.\n\n[47] Judges ix. 24.\n\n[48] Judges xvii. last verse.\n\n[49] Judges xviii. 11\u201329.\n\n[50] Judges xviii. 11\u201339.\n\n[51] The author evidently confounds Elisha and Elijah.\n\n[52] Those who are unacquainted with the customs of antiquity,\nand who judge only from what they see about them, may possibly be\nastonished at this odd command; but they should reflect, that at\nthose times it was the custom in Egypt, and most part of Assyria, to\nexpress things by hieroglyphical figures, signs, and types.\n\nThe prophets, who were called seers by the Egyptians and Jews,\nnot only expressed themselves in allegories, but also represented\nby signs those events which they foretold. Thus we find Isaiah,\nthe chief of the four greater prophets, taking a roll and writing\ntherein, \u201cMaher-Shalal-Hashbaz,\u201d that is, \u201cMake haste to the spoil\u201d;\nand going in unto the prophetess, she conceived and bare a son, whom\nthe Lord called Maher-Shalal-Hashbaz. This is a type of the evils\nwhich were to be brought upon the Jews by the people of Egypt and\nAssyria.\n\nThe prophet also says: \u201cBefore that the child shall be of an age to\neat butter and honey, to refuse the evil and choose the good, the\nland that they abhorred shall be delivered of both her kings; and the\nLord will hiss to the flies of Egypt, and for the bees of Assyr, and\nthe Lord will shave with a razor that is hired, the beard and the\nhair of the feet of the king of Assyria.\u201d*\n\n                    * Isaiah vii. 15\u201318.\n\nThis prophecy of the bees, and of the shaving of the beard, and of\nthe hair of the feet, can be understood only by those who know that\nit was a custom to call the swarms of bees together by the sound of a\nflageolet or pipe, or some other rustic instrument; that the greatest\naffront that could be done to any man was to cut off his beard; and\nthat the hair on the private parts was called the hair of the feet,\nwhich was never shaven but in cases of leprosy, or other unclean\ndisorders. All these figures, which would appear so strange in our\nstyle, signify nothing more than that the Lord will, in the course of\na few years, deliver His people from captivity.\n\nWe find the same prophet walking naked and barefoot to show that\nthe king of Assyria shall lead away the Egyptians and Ethiopians\ncaptives, without their having wherewithal to cover their\nnakedness.\u2020\n\n                    \u2020 Isaiah xx.\n\nThe prophet Ezekiel eats the roll of parchment which God had given\nhim; afterwards he eats his bread covered with excrement, and\ncontinues to lie on his left side three hundred and ninety days,\nand forty days on his right side, to show that the Jews should want\nbread, and as a type of the number of years they were to remain in\ncaptivity. He loads himself with chains, as a figure of those that\nthey are to wear; and he cuts off the hair of his head and of his\nbeard, and divides them into three parts; the first of these portions\nis a type of those who are to perish in the city of Jerusalem; the\nsecond, of such as are to be slain without the walls; and the third,\nof those who are to be carried away to Babylon.\u2021\n\n                    \u2021 Ezek. iv. seq.\n\nThe prophet Hosea takes to himself a woman who is an adulteress, and\nwhom he purchases for fifteen pieces of silver, and for an homer\nand a half of barley, and says unto her: \u201cThou shalt abide for me\nmany days, thou shalt not play the harlot, and thou shalt not be for\nanother man, for so shall the children of Israel abide many days\nwithout a king, and without a prince, and without an image, and\nwithout an ephod, and without teraphim\u201d;\u00a7 in a word, the seers or\nprophets scarcely ever foretell anything without using a type or sign\nof the thing foretold.\n\n                    \u00a7 Hosea iii.\n\nJeremiah therefore only conformed to the usual custom when he bound\nhimself with cords, and put bonds and yokes upon his neck, as figures\nof the approaching slavery of those to whom he sent them, and if we\nattend properly to these things, we shall find the times here spoken\nof to be like those of an old world, differing in everything from the\nnew society. The laws, the manner of making war, were all absolutely\ndifferent; and if we only open Homer and the first book of Herodotus,\nwe need nothing more to convince us that there is not the least\nresemblance between the people of early antiquity and ourselves;\nhence we ought to distrust our own judgment, when we attempt to\ncompare their manners with ours. Even nature herself is not now the\nsame she was then; magicians and sorcerers had at that time a power\nover her which they no longer possess; they enchanted serpents, they\nraised the dead out of their tombs, etc. God sent dreams, and men\ninterpreted them. The gift of prophecy was common. And we read of\nseveral metamorphoses, such as of Nebuchadnezzar into an ox, of Lot\u2019s\nwife into a pillar of salt, and of five whole cities changed in an\ninstant into a burning lake.\n\nThere were likewise several species of men that no longer exist. The\nrace of giants, Rephaim, Emim, Nephilim, and Enacim, have totally\ndisappeared. St. Augustine, in his fifth book \u201c_De Civitate Dei_,\u201d\nsays that he saw a tooth of one of those ancient giants that was\nat least a hundred times as large as one of our grinders. Ezekiel\nspeaks of pygmies (_Gamadim_), not above a cubit high, who fought at\nthe siege of Tyre; and almost all writers, sacred and profane, have\nagreed in the truth of these relations.\n\nIn fine, the ancient world was so different from ours that there is\nno drawing any rule for our conduct from it; and if in the earliest\nages of antiquity we find mankind mutually persecuting and destroying\none another on account of their different faiths, far be it from\nus, who live under the enlightened law of grace, to copy after such\noriginals.\n\n[53] Jer. xxvii. xxviii.\n\n[54] Isaiah xliv. and xlv.\n\n[55] Malachi i. 1.\n\n[56] Deut. xxviii. 28 and seq.\n\n[57] There is but one passage in the whole Mosaic law from which one\nmight conclude that Moses was acquainted with the reigning opinion\namong the Egyptians, that the soul did not die with the body. This\npassage is very particular, and is in the eighteenth chapter of\nDeuteronomy: \u201cThere shall not be found among you any one that useth\ndivination, or an observer of times, or an enchanter, or a witch,\nor a charmer, or a consulter with familiar spirits (Python), or a\nwizard, or a necromancer.\u201d From this passage it appears that by\ninvoking the souls of the dead this pretended necromancy supposed a\npermanency of the soul. It might also happen that the necromancers\nof whom Moses speaks, being but ignorant deceivers, might not have a\ndistinct idea of the magic they operated. They made people believe\nthat they forced the dead to speak, and by the power of their art\nrestored the body to the same state as when living; without once\nexamining whether their ridiculous operations might authorize the\ndoctrine of the immortality of the soul. The ancient magicians were\nnever philosophers; they were at best but a set of stupid jugglers,\nwho played their tricks before as illiterate spectators.\n\nBut what is very strange and worthy of observation is that the word\n\u201cpython\u201d should be found in Deuteronomy so long before that Greek\nterm was known to the Hebrews; and indeed this word is not to be\nfound in the Hebrew, of which we have never had a good translation.\n\nThere are many insurmountable difficulties in this language; it is a\nmixture of Ph\u0153nician, Egyptian, Syriac, and Arabic, and has undergone\nmany alterations to the present time. The Hebrew verbs had only two\nmoods, the present and the future; the rest were to be guessed at\nby the sense. The different vowels were frequently expressed by the\nsame characters, or rather, indeed, they were not expressed at all;\nand the inventors of points have only increased the difficulties they\nmeant to remove. Every adverb had twenty different significations,\nand the same word had frequently several contrary senses. Add to this\nthat the language was in itself very dry and barren; for the Jews,\nnot being acquainted with the arts, could not express what they knew\nnothing of. In a word, the Hebrew is to the Greek what the language\nof a pedant is to that of an academic.\n\n[58] Ezek. xviii. 20.\n\n[59] The opinion of Ezekiel was at length the prevailing one of the\nsynagogue; not but that there were always some Jews who, though they\nbelieved in a state of eternal punishment, yet believed at the same\ntime that God punished the sins of the fathers upon the children.\nAt present, indeed, they are punished even beyond the fiftieth\ngeneration, and yet are in danger of eternal punishment. It may be\nasked how the offsprings of those Jews who were not concerned in\nputting Christ to death can be temporarily punished in the persons\nof their children, who were as innocent as themselves. This temporal\npunishment, or rather this manner of living, so different from all\nother people, and of trading over the whole earth without having any\ncountry of their own, cannot be considered as a punishment, compared\nwith what they are to expect hereafter on account of their unbelief,\nand which they might avoid by a sincere repentance.\n\n[60] Ezek. xx. 25.\n\n[61] Those who have thought to discover the doctrine of hell and\nheaven, such as it is now believed by us, in the Mosaic books, have\nbeen strangely mistaken; their error is owing entirely to an idle\ndispute about words: the Vulgate having translated the Hebrew word\n_Sheol_, the pit, by the Latin word _infernum_, and this latter\nhaving been rendered in French by _enfer_, hell, they have taken\noccasion from this equivocal translation to establish a belief that\nthe ancient Hebrews had a notion of the _Hades_ and _Tartarus_ of the\nGreeks, known to other nations before them by different appellations.\n\nWe are told in the sixteenth chapter of Numbers, that the earth\nopened her mouth and swallowed up Korah, Dathan, and Abiron, and they\nand all that appertained to them went down alive into the pit, or\ngrave; now certainly there is nothing said in this passage concerning\nthe souls of these three persons, nor yet of the torments of hell,\nnor of eternal punishments.\n\nIt is very extraordinary that the authors of the \u201c_Dictionnaire\nEncyclop\u00e9dique_\u201d under the word _hell_ (_enfer_) should say that the\nancient Hebrews believed in its existence. If this be true, there\nwould be an insurmountable contradiction in the Pentateuch; for why\nshould Moses have spoken of the punishment after death in one single\npassage only, of all his works. On this occasion they quote the\nthirty-second chapter of Deuteronomy; but after a mutilated manner.\nThe whole passage is as follows: \u201cThey have moved me to jealousy with\nthat which is not God, they have provoked me to anger with their\nvanities, and I will move them to jealousy with those that are not\na people, I will provoke them to anger with a foolish nation. For a\nfire is kindled in my anger, and shall burn unto the lowest hell;\nand shall consume the earth with her increase, and set on fire the\nfoundations of the mountains. I will heap mischiefs upon them; I will\nspend mine arrows upon them. They shall be burnt with hunger, and\ndevoured with burning heat and with bitter destruction; I will also\nsend the teeth of beasts upon them, with the poison of serpents of\nthe dust.\u201d\n\nBut have any or all of these expressions the least relation to the\nidea of hell-torments? On the contrary, it seems as if these words\nwere purposely inserted to prove that our hell was unknown to the\nancient Jews.\n\nThe author of this article quotes also the following passage from\nthe twenty-fourth chapter of Job: \u201cThe eye of the adulterer waiteth\nfor the twilight, saying, no eye shall see me, and disguiseth his\nface. In the dark they dig through houses which they had marked for\nthemselves in the daytime. They know not the light, for the morning\nis to them as the shadow of death; if one know them, they are in the\nterrors of the shadow of death. He is swift as the waters, their\nportion is cursed in the earth, he beholdeth not the way of the\nvineyards. Drought and heat consume the snow-waters, so doth the\ngrave those who have sinned.\u201d\n\nI quote these passages entire, otherwise it will be impossible to\nform a true idea of them. But let me ask if there is the least\nexpression here from which one may conclude that Moses ever taught\nthe Jews the clear and simple doctrine of eternal rewards and\npunishments?\n\nNot to mention that the Book of Job has nothing to do with the Mosaic\nlaw, there is great reason to believe that Job himself was not a\nJew; this is the opinion of St. Jerome in his \u201cHebrew Questions upon\nGenesis.\u201d The word Satan, which occurs in Job, was not known to the\nJews, nor is it anywhere to be found in the five books of Moses. This\nname, as well as those of Gabriel and Raphael, were entirely unknown\nto the Jews before their captivity in Babylon. It would appear, then,\nthat Job is very improperly quoted in this place.\n\nBut the last chapter of Isaiah is likewise brought in, where it is\nsaid: \u201cAnd it shall come to pass that from one new moon to another,\nand from one Sabbath to another, shall all flesh come to worship\nbefore me, saith the Lord. And they shall go forth and look upon the\ncarcasses of the men that have transgressed against me; for their\nworm shall not die, neither shall their fire be quenched, and they\nshall be an abhorring unto all flesh.\u201d\n\nCertainly, the casting out of these bodies to the view of all\npassengers, even to abhorring, and their being eaten by worms, can\nnever mean that Moses taught the Jews the doctrine of the immortality\nof the soul; and the words \u201cthe fire shall not be quenched\u201d can as\nlittle signify that the bodies so exposed to public view were to\nsuffer eternal torments in hell.\n\nHow can any one quote a passage in Isaiah to prove that the Jews in\nthe time of Moses had adopted the doctrine of the immortality of\nthe soul? According to the Hebrew computation, Isaiah prophesied\nabout the year of the world 3380. Moses lived about the year 2500;\ntherefore there was a distance of eight centuries between the one and\nthe other. Now it is an insult to common sense, a downright mockery,\nthus to abuse the licence of quoting, by pretending to prove that a\nwriter was of this or that opinion from a passage in another writer\nwho lived eight hundred years after him, and who has not even made\nany mention of such opinion. It is beyond contradiction that the\nimmortality of the soul, and rewards and punishments after death, are\nclearly and positively expressed and declared in the New Testament,\nand it is equally certain, that nothing concerning them is to be\nfound in any one part of the five books of Moses.\n\nNotwithstanding that the Jews did afterwards embrace this doctrine,\nthey were far from having a proper idea of the spirituality of the\nsoul; they thought, in common with most other nations, that the\nsoul was an uncompounded aerial light substance that retained the\nappearance of the body it had formerly animated; and hence came the\nterm apparition, manes of the dead. Several fathers of the Church\nwere of the same opinion. Tertullian, in his twenty-second chapter\n\u201c_De Anima_,\u201d expresses himself thus: \u201c_Definimus animam Dei flatu\nnatam, immortalem, corporalem, effigiatam, substantia simplicem_\u201d;\nthat is, \u201cWe define the soul a substance, formed by the breath of\nGod; of an immortal, corporeal, figurative, and simple nature.\u201d\n\nSt. Iren\u00e6us, in the thirty-fourth chapter of his second book,\nsays: \u201c_Incorporales sunt anim\u00e6 quantum ad comparationem mortalium\ncorporum_.\u201d \u201cSouls are incorporeal in comparison of mortal bodies.\u201d\nAdding, \u201cChrist has taught us that the soul retains the image of the\nbody\u201d; \u201c_Caracterem corporum in quo adoptantur_,\u201d etc. Christ does\nnot appear ever to have taught such a doctrine, and it is difficult\nto understand what St. Iren\u00e6us means in this passage.\n\nSt. Hilarius, in his commentary on St. Matthew, is still more express\nand positive; he roundly asserts the soul to have a corporeal\nsubstance, \u201c_Corpoream natur\u00e6 su\u00e6 substantiam sortiuntur_.\u201d\n\nSt. Ambrose on Abraham, book ii. chap. viii., will have it that\nthere is nothing free from matter, unless it be the substance of the\nBlessed Trinity.\n\nThese reverend fathers seem to have been very indifferent\nphilosophers; but there is the greatest reason to believe that their\ndivinity was in the main very sound, inasmuch as, notwithstanding\ntheir ignorance of the incomprehensible nature of the soul, they\nasserted it to be immortal, and endeavored to make it Christian.\n\nWe know that the soul is of a spiritual nature, but we do not at all\nknow what spirit is. We are very imperfectly acquainted with matter;\nnor is it possible for us to have a distinct idea of what is not\nmatter. Hardly capable of understanding what effects our senses have,\nwe cannot of ourselves know anything of what surpasses the bound of\nthose senses. We carry some few words of our common language into the\ninexplorable depths of metaphysics and divinity, in order to acquire\nsome slight idea of those things, which we could never conceive or\nexpress; and we use those words as props to support the steps of our\nfeeble understandings in travelling through those unknown regions.\n\nThus we make use of the word spirit, which is the same as breath or\nair, to express something which is not matter; and this word breath,\nair, spirit, inspiring us insensibly with an idea of an uncompounded\nand light substance, we still refine upon this as much as possible,\nin order to obtain a proper conception of pure and simple\nspirituality; but we shall never be able to obtain a distinct notion\nof this, we do not even know what we say, when we pronounce the word\nsubstance; in its literal signification, it signifies something\nbeneath, and thereby shows us that it is incomprehensible; for what\nis meant by that which is beneath? The knowledge of the secrets of\nGod is not to be acquired in this life. Plunged as we are in mortal\nobscurity, we fight against one another, and strike at random in the\ndarkness with which we are surrounded, without precisely knowing for\nwhat we are fighting.\n\nIf mankind would consider all this with attention, every reasonable\nperson will be ready to conclude that we ought to have the greatest\nindulgence for the opinions of others, and by our conduct endeavor to\nmerit the same from them.\n\nThe above remarks are not at all foreign to the principal point in\nquestion, which is to know whether men are bound to tolerate one\nanother; inasmuch as by proving that in all times those of different\nopinions have been alike mistaken, it appears to have been the duty\nof all mankind in every age to treat each other with kindness and\nforbearance.\n\n[62] The doctrine of predestination is of long standing and\nuniversal; we find it in Homer. Jupiter was desirous to save the\nlife of his son Sarpedon; but destiny had marked him for death, and\nJupiter was obliged to submit. Destiny was, with the philosophers,\neither the necessary concatenation of causes and effects necessarily\nproduced by nature, or that same concatenation ordained by\nProvidence; the latter of which is most reasonable. We find the\nwhole system of fatality or predestination, comprised in this line\nof Ann\u00e6us Seneca: \u201c_Ducunt volentem fata, nolentem trahunt_.\u201d It has\nalways been acknowledged that God governs the universe by eternal,\nuniversal and immutable laws; this truth gave rise to the many\nunintelligible disputes concerning free-will, which had never been\ndefined before the great philosopher Locke arose, who has proved it\nto be the power of acting. God bestows this power, and man, acting\nfreely according to the eternal decrees of Providence, is one of the\nwheels of the great machine of the universe. Free-will has been a\nsubject of disputation from all antiquity; but no one until of late\ntimes was ever persecuted on this subject. How horrible, how absurd\nis it to have imprisoned and banished on account of this dispute a\nPompone d\u2019Andilly, an Arnauld, a Nicole, a Sacy, and so many others\nwho were the shining lights of France!\n\n[63] The theological romance of the Metempsychosis came from India,\na part of the world to which we are indebted for many more fables\nthan is generally believed. We find this doctrine explained by that\nbeautiful poet Ovid, in the twelfth book of his \u201c_Metamorphoses_.\u201d\nIt has been received in almost every part of the world, and has\neverywhere met with its opposers; nevertheless, we do not find that\nany priest among the ancients ever caused a disciple of Pythagoras to\nbe sent to prison.\n\n[64] Neither the ancient Jews, the Egyptians, nor the Greeks, their\ncontemporaries, believed that the soul of man went to heaven after\ndeath. The Jews thought that the sun and moon were placed some\nleagues above us in the same circle, and that the firmament was a\nthick and solid vault, that supported the weight of the waters,\nwhich, however, sometimes ran out through the crevices in this\nvault. The ancient Greeks placed the palace of their gods upon Mount\nOlympus. And the abode of heroes after death was, in Homer\u2019s time,\nthought to be in an island beyond the ocean. This likewise was the\nopinion of the Essenians.\n\nAfter Homer, planets were assigned to the gods; but there was no more\nreason for men to place a god in the moon than for the inhabitants\nof the moon to place a god in our planet of the earth. Juno and Iris\nhad no other palaces assigned them but the clouds, where there was\nno place to rest the soles of their feet. Among the Sab\u00e6ans every\ndeity had its star. But as the stars are little suns, it would be\nimpossible to live there without partaking of the nature of fire.\nUpon the whole, then, it is needless to inquire what the ancients\nthought of heaven; since the best answer that can be given is, they\nthought nothing about it.\n\n[65] Matthew xxii. 1\u201313.\n\n[66] St. Luke xiv.\n\n[67] It was indeed very difficult, not to say impossible, for the\nJews to comprehend, without an immediate revelation, the ineyable\nmystery of the incarnation of God, the Son of God. In the sixth\nchapter of Genesis we find the sons of great men called \u201cthe sons of\nGod.\u201d In like manner the royal Psalmist calls the tall cedars \u201cthe\ncedars of God.\u201d Samuel says, \u201cThe fear of God fell upon the people\u201d;\nthat is, a violent fear seized them. A great tempest is called the\nwind of the Lord, and Saul\u2019s distemper, the melancholy of the Lord.\nNevertheless, the Jews seemed to have clearly understood that our\nSaviour called Himself the Son of God in the proper sense of that\nword; and if they looked upon this as a blasphemous expression, it\nis an additional proof of their ignorance of the incarnation, and\nof God, the Son of God, being sent upon earth for the redemption of\nmankind.\n\n[68] Matthew xxvi. 61\u201364.\n\n[69] See that excellent book, entitled, \u201cThe Manual of the\nInquisition.\u201d\n\n[70] Now Bona, a town of Constantine in Africa. St. Augustine was\nbishop of this see above forty years. It now belongs to Algiers.\n\n\n\n\nTRANSCRIBER\u2019S NOTES\n\nOriginal printed spelling and grammar are retained, with a few\nexceptions noted below. Small caps are changed to all capital\nletters. Italics _look like this_. The original page numbers have\nbeen removed. The four illustrations were originally printed full\npage, with their captions printed alone on an adjacent page. In\nthis edition, the captions are combined appropriately with the\nillustrations, which are moved to locations near their original\nlocations, but between paragraphs of text. Scans of the original book\nmay be found at archive.org\u2014search for \u201cworksofvoltaire04voltiala\u201d.\n\nThere were seventy level-one footnotes, some extending over several\npages, and nine level-two footnotes anchored within level-one\nfootnotes. The level-one footnotes were renumbered, and are moved to\nthe ends of their two sections\u2014_Dialogue Between Madame de Maintenon\nand Mdlle. de l\u2019Enclos_ and _A Treatise on Toleration_. The nested\nfootnotes remain near their anchors.\n\nPage 229: A matching right double quotation mark was added to the\nphrase _\u201cas God being their King, and exercising justice immediately\nupon them, according to their transgression or obedience, found it\nnot necessary to reveal to them a doctrine which He reserved for\nafter-times, when He should no longer so directly govern His people_.","title":"The Works of Voltaire, Vol. IV of XLIII.: Romances, Vol. III of III, and A Treatise on Toleration.","tradition":"philosophy-ethics","translated_text":null,"word_count":75140}